493 20 10383 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/34bab60d25c74870dbaa06a478b34172.pdf f4f6af151740aa8ed02112f1393936ea Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. ·J AGENDA ZONING C0r1MITTEE Meeting, Thursday, July 24, 1969 Aldermanic Chamber, Second Floor , Ci ty Hall, 2:00 P. M. 1/U-69-34-S An Application f or a Special Use Permit for a church to be located at MACON DRIVE, f ronting 40 feet on the east side of Macon Dri ve, S.W., beginning 31 6 .5 f e~t north from the corner of Bromack Drive, S.W. Depth appro x i ma t ely 624 feet. Land Lot 70, 14th Di strict, Fulton County, Georgia. Mrs . Thelma Lois Mo r gan, Owner New Hope Baptist Church - Appl i cant Propos ed Use - Church (Planning Board, adverse r ecommenda t ion) WARD 4 iffaZ-69 - 93-S An Ordi nance to r e zone from A-1-C (Apartme nt-Conditional) Di strict to C-1 (Commerc i al) Di s tr i ct, prop ert y located at the Northeast corne r of OLD HAPEVILLE ROAD a nd CLEVELAND AVENUE , S. W., fronting 200 f ee t on the nor th s ide o f Cleve l a nd Avenue, S .W., beg inning 0 fe e t fro m t he nor theast c orne r of Old Hapeville Ro a d. Depth 456 fe e t . Are a 92,00 0 square fe e t. Land Lot 69, 14th Di strict, Fulton County, Georgi a . · Dr . Rob e rt B. Hodgson, Owner-App l i cant Proposed Us e - Off ice & Se rv i c e Sta tion (Plann i ng Boa r d, advers e r e commend ation) WARD 4 iffaZ-69-91 - S An Or d i na nc e t o re zone from R- 4 (Re si dential) District to A-1 - C (Apart me nt- Conditiona l) Di s trict , pro perty loca t ed at 2965 BROHNS MI LL ROAD, S .E. , fr onti ng 78 . 2 f e et on the west s i de of Browns Mi l l Road , begi nni ng 930 fe e t fro m the s out hwest corne r of Spri ngside Dr i ve . De pth 1,024 feet . Area approximat~ly 78 ,0 00 square fe et . La nd Lot 61 , 14th Di stri c t, Fulton County , Georgi a. William T. St anfie ld , Owne r Robert A. Young - Appli c a nt Proposed Us e - Apartment s WARD 4 (Planning Board, adverse r.e commendat_i on) · An Ordinance to rez one fr om R-4 (Residential )D i s tr i c t to A-1 (Apar t ment) Di strict, property lo cated at 311 6 BROHNS MILL ROAD , f r on ti ng 251. 5 feet on t he northeast side o f Browns Mill Road , beg inning 500 . 7 feet from the no r theast co r ner of Humph r ies Dr ive . Depth va r ie s . _Area 23 . 3 ac r e s . Land Lot s 35 & 62 , 14t h Di s t r i ct , Fult on County , Georg i a . Ruby All e ne Brooks & W. T . Atkinso n, Owne r s B &. H Compa ny - Applican t Propo s ed Us e - Apa rt me nt s (Planning Board, adve r s e recomme ndati on) WARD 4 1/Z- 69-89-S �ZONING COMMITTEE AGENDA Page· 2 July 24, 1969 ifrZ-69-84-s ·An Ordinance to rezone from A-1 (Apartment) Di strict to C-1 (Commercial) District, property located at J ONESBORO ROAD, fronting 652.5 feet on the southwesterly side of Jonesboro Road, beginn i ng 707.06 feet f ro m the southwe st corner of Macedonia Road. Depth 1048.43 feet. Area 16.4 acres . La nd Lot 34, 14th District , Fulton County, Georgia. The Mi litary Corpo r ation, Owner Theodore G. Frankel - Applicant Proposed Use - Shopp i ng Center & Office Park (Planning Board, favor able recommendation as amended to C-1-C) WARD 4 ifZ-69-80-S An Or dinance to r e zone f rom R-4 (Re s i dent ia l) District to A-2 (Apartment) District, property loca ted at 2946 & 2954 HAPEVILLE ROAD, S.H. , f r onting 192 feet on the east side of Ha pevi lle Road, S. W. , beginning 389 fe e t from the northeast corner of Mt. Zi on Road. Dep th 293.4 f eet . Ar ea 56,208 s quar e fee t. La nd Lot 68 , 14 th Di st rict , Ful to n County , Georgi a . Benj ami n F . Ma rti n, Owner-App lica nt Pr opo sed Use - Apartme nts (Planning Boar d, adverse recomme ndation) WARD 4 !IU- 69- 30- S An Applica t io n fo r a Spe c ia l Us e Permi t fo r a Day Nur s ery to be located at 3825 ADAMSVILLE DRIVE, S.W. , fronting 100 f ee t on the no rth s i de of Adams vi lle Dr i ve, S.W . , begi nni ng 393 . 7 fe e t east f rom the cor ner o f Woodstock Drive. Depth 200 feet. La nd Lot 14 , 14th FF Dis t ric t , Fulton Count y, Georgi a. Emma Hunt (Renfroe), Owner Doris Stri ck land - App l icant Pr opos ed Us e - Day Nu rsery (Planning Board, favor able r ecommendation) WARD 7 U-69-31-C An App l i cat io n f o r a Spe c i al Us e Permi t f or a Nur sing Home to be located at 120 LINE ROAD, S. W. , fr onting 252 feet o n the e ast side of Li ne Roa d, be ginni ng 680 f eet no r th from the co r ner o f Br anch Dr ive. D~pth 698 fe et. Land L6t 13, · 14 t h Dis t ric t , Ful t on County , Georgia ABDEC , I nc . , Owner- Appl icant Propos ed Use - Nursi ng home (Pla nning Boar d, favorable r ecomme ndation) WARD 7 Z- 69 - 85 - S An Or dinance to rezone from R-5 (Res ident ial) and A- 1 (Apartment) Di s t r icts to C- 1 (Commercial) Di stri ct, prope rty l ocate d at STEWART AVENUE, fronting 131 fe et on t he e a s t s ide of Stewart Avenue , b egi nning O feet from t he north c orner o f Grant Stree t . Depth 218 feet . Area 14,25& swuare f eet . La nd Lot 90, 14t h Dist r i ct, Fulton County, Georgia . Carrie Blake, Ow ner C. M. Mcche s ney ,- Appl i ca nt Proposed Use - Service Station WARD 4 (Planning Board , favorab l e recommendation) �ZONING.COMMITTEE AGENDA Page 3 July 24, 1969 ffaZ-69-83-S An Ordinance to rezone from R-3 (Residential) District to C-1 (Commercial) District, property located at 1955 CAMPBELLTON ROAD, fronting 260.7 feet on the north side of Campbellton Road, beginning O feet from the northeast corner of Honeysuckle Lane. Depth 212.1 feet. Area approximately 66,000 square feet. Land Lot 168, 14th District, Fulton County, Georgia. Perry Boulevard, Inc., Owner-Applicant Proposed Use - Service Station (Planning Board, favorable recommendation) WARD 7 ffaZ-69-94-S An Ordinance to rezone from C-L (Commercial-Limited) District to C-1 (Commercial) District, property located at 2860 CAMPBELLTON ROAD, S.W., fronting 120 feet on the south side o f Campbe llton Road, beginning 293 feet from the east corner of Naxwe ll Drive. Dep th 340 feet. Area 33,000+ · square feet. Land Lot 218, 14th D~strict, Fulton County, Georgia. Ellis Maloof, Owner-Applicant Proposed Use - Car Wash (Planning Board, favorable recomme ndat i on) WARD 7 ffaU-69-33-S An Application for a Specia l Use Permit for a Car Wash and Service Station, to . be located at 2360 CAMPBELLTON ROAD, S .H., fronting 120 feet on the south side of Campbel lton Road , beginning 293 f ee t east fro1:1 the corne r of Maxwe ll Drive. Depth 340 feet. Land Lot 218 , 14th Di s trict, Fulton County, Georgia. Ellis Maloo f, Owner-Appli ca nt Proposed Use - Car Wash & Servi ce Station (Planning Board , favo rab l e recommendation) WARD 7 Z-69-96-S An Ordi nance to re zone from R-4 (Residential) Di5trict to A-1 (Apartme nt) District, p r operty located at FAIRBURN ROAD, S.W., fronting 100 feet on the west side o f Fairburn Road, beginning 720 feet ,ram the . south ~orne r of . qarrison Drive . De pth 800± feet. Area 236,013 square feet. Land Lot 8, 14th FF District, Ful ton County, Georgia. D. E. Norr is, Owner E. Lane Brown-Applicant Proposed Use - Apartments (Planning Board, adverse recommendation) WARD 7 � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document #U-69-34-S #Z-69-93-S #Z-69-91-S #Z-69-89-S AGENDA ZONING COMMITTEE Meeting, Thursday, July 24, 1969 Aldermanic Chamber, Second Floor, City Hall, 2:00 P.M. An Application for a Special Use Permit for a church to be located at MACON DRIVE, fronting 40 feet on the east side of Macon Drive, S.W., beginning 316.5 feet north from the corner of Bromack Drive, S.W. Depth approximately 624 feet. Land Lot 70, 14th District, Fulton County, Georgia. Mrs. Thelma Lois Morgan, Owner New Hope Baptist Church - Applicant Proposed Use - Church (Planning Board, adverse recommendation) WARD 4 An Ordinance to rezone from A-1-C (Apartment-Conditional) District to C-l (Commercial) District, property located at the Northeast corner of OLD HAPEVILLE ROAD and CLEVELAND AVENUE, S.W., fronting 200 feet on the north side of Cleveland Avenue, S.W., beginning O feet from the northeast corner of Old Hapeville Road. Depth 456 feet. Area 92,000 square feet. Land Lot 69, 14th District, Fulton County, Georgia. Dr. Robert B. Hodgson, Owner-Applicant Proposed Use - Office & Service Station (Planning Board, adverse recommendation) WARD 4 An Ordinance to rezone from R-4 (Residential) District to A-1-C (Apartment-Conditional) District, property located at 2965 BROWNS MILL ROAD, S.E., fronting 78.2 feet on the west side of Browns Mill Road, beginning 930 feet from the southwest corner of Springside Drive. Depth 1,024 feet. Area approximately 78,900 square feet. Land Lot 61, 14th District, Fulton County, Georgia. William T. Stanfield, Owner Robert A. Young - Applicant Proposed Use - Apartments WARD 4 (Planning Board, adverse recommendation): yg? ei An Ordinance to rezone from R-4 (nesidentialipiecetce to A-1 (Apartment) District, property located at 3116 BROWNS MILL ROAD, fronting 251.5 feet on the northeast side of Browns Mill Road, beginning 500.7 feet from the northeast corner of Humphries Drive. Depth varies. Area 23.3 acres. Land Lots 35 & 62, 14th District, Fulton County, Georgia. Ruby Allene Brooks & W. T. Atkinson, Owners B & H Company - Applicant Proposed Use - Apartments (Planning Board, adverse recommendation) WARD 4 Sige a ar Aiello, scant ZONING COMMITTEE AGENDA Page 2 July 24, 1969 #Z-69-84-S #Z-69-80-S #U-69-30-S #U-69-31-C An Ordinance to rezone from A-1 (Apartment) District to C-1 (Commercial) District, property located at JONESBORO ROAD, fronting 652.5 feet on the southwesterly side of Jonesboro Road, beginning 707.06 feet from the southwest corner of Macedonia Road. Depth 1048.43 feet. Area 16.4 acres. Land Lot 34, 14th District, Fulton County, Georgia. The Military Corporation, Owner Theodore G. Frankel - Applicant Proposed Use - Shopping Center & Office Park (Planning Board, favorable recommendation as amended to C-1-C) WARD 4 An Ordinance to rezone from R-4 (Residential) District to A-2 (Apartment) District, property located at 2946 & 2954 HAPEVILLE ROAD, S.W., fronting 192 feet on the east side of Hapeville Road, S.W., beginning 389 feet from the northeast corner of Mt. Zion Road. Depth 293.4 feet. Area 56,208 square feet. Land Lot 68, 14th District, Fulton County, Georgia. Benjamin F. Martin, Owner-Applicant Proposed Use ~- Apartments (Planning Board, adverse recommendation) ‘ WARD 4 An Application for a Special Use Permit for a Day Nursery to be located at 3625 ADAMSVILLE DRIVE, S.W., fronting 100 feet on the north side of Adamsville Drive, S.W., beginning 393.7 feet east from the corner of Woodstock Drive. Depth 200 feet. Land Lot 14, 14th FF District, Fulton County, Georgia. Emma Hunt (Renfroe), Owner Doris Strickland - Applicant Proposed Use - Day Nursery (Planning Board, favorable recommendation) WARD 7 An Application for a Special Use Permit for a Nursing Home to be located at 120 LINE ROAD, S.W., fronting 252 feet on the east side of Line Road, beginning 680 feet north from the corner of Branch Drive. Depth 698 feet. Land Lot 13, 14th District, Fulton County, Georgia ABDEC, Inc., Owner-Applicant Proposed Use - Nursing home (Planning Board, favorable recommendation) WARD 7 #Z-69-85-S - An Ordinance to rezone from R-5 (Residential) and A~1 (Apartment) Districts to C-1 (Commercial) District, property located at STEWART AVENUE, fronting 131 feet on the east side of Stewart Avenue, beginning 0 feet from the north corner of Grant Street. Depth 218 feet. Area 14,258 swuare feet. Land Lot 90, 14th District, Fulton County, Georgia. 3 Carrie Blake, Owner Cc. M. McChesney,- Applicant Proposed Use - Service Station WARD 4 (Planning Board, favorable recommendation)  sl isha ZONING COMMITTEE AGENDA Page 3 July 24, 1969 #Z-69-83-S_ - #Z-69-94-S = #U-69-33-S - #Z-69-96-S - An Ordinance to rezone from R-3 (Residential) District to C-1 (Commercial) District, property located at 1955 CAMPBELLTON ROAD, fronting 260.7 feet on the north side of Campbellton Road, beginning O feet from the northeast corner of Honeysuckle Lane. Depth 212.1 feet. Area approximately 66,000 square feet. Land Lot 168, 14th District, Fulton County, Georgia. Perry Boulevard, Inec., Owner-Applicant Proposed Use - Service Station (Planning Board, favorable recommendation) WARD 7 An Ordinance to rezone from C-L (Commercial-Limited) District to C-1 (Commercial) District, property located at 2860 CAMPBELLTON ROAD, S.W., fronting 120 feet on the south side of Campbellton Road, beginning 293 feet from the east corner of Maxwell Drive. Depth 340 feet. Area 33,000+'square feet. Land Lot 218, 14th District, Fulton County, Georgia. Ellis Maloof, Owner-Applicant Proposed Use - Car Wash (Planning Board, favorable recommendation) WARD 7 An Application for a Special Use Permit for a Car Wash and Service Station, to be located at 2860 CAMPBELLTON ROAD, S.W., fronting 120 feet on the south side of Campbellton Road, beginning 293 feet east from the corner of Maxwell Drive. Depth 340 feet. Land Lot 218, 14th District, Fulton County, Georgia. Ellis Maloof, Owner-Applicant Proposed Use - Car Wash & Service Station (Planning Board, favorable recommendation) WARD 7 An Ordinance to rezone from R-4 (Residential) District to A-l (Apartment) District, property located at FAIRBURN ROAD, S.W., fronting 100 feet on the west side of Fairburn Road, beginning 720 feet from the, south corner of, Garrison Drive. Depth 800+ feet. Area 236,013 square feet. Land Lot 8, 14th FF District, Fulton County, Georgia. D. E. Norris, Owner E. Lane Brown-Applicant Proposed Use - Apartments (Planning Board, adverse recommendation) WARD 7 i A te he acre to  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 2, Folder 1, Document 2 Box 2 Box 2 Folder 1 Folder topic: Planning department | 1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/836a13858e73dbbf72d70d9b8efe6435.pdf 906301a1914305d6ad98b2a21a4081f7 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. .------ - - - - - - - - - - - -- -- - -- - --- .July 18, 1969 (',.__ A meeting of the Planning and Development Committee was held in Committee Room 2, Second Floor, City Hall, at 2 :00 P. M., Friday, July 18, 1969. @ ...... Committee members present: ~ Rodney Cook, Chairman Q. V. Williamson Jack Summers John Flanigen ~ ~ ......~~ w (/) < w Committee members absent: c· Gregory Griggs Char.li e Leftwich George Cotsakis Hugh Pierce ....!.. c~: 2: J cc 0 0 co Edwin Sterne, ) Frank Etheridge ) Housing Authority The Chairman called the meeting to order and the following business was considered: 1 I • A r-'\ • PUBLIC HEARI NG - ANN EXA. TIOI'-! PETITION BY JULIUS SCHNEIDER MEDICAL FOUNDATION, INC., COLUMBUS UNION CONFERENCE ASSOCIATION OF SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST AND EUGENE A. ANDERSON. Charl es Watkins, First National Bank Building, was present representing the three property owners involved. Two other persons were prese nt in support of the annexation. There wa s no opp:isition. @ .,.. "" ~ ·O "-111 ...... w ,£,,, (/) ( '-..._., tat'( LiJ The staff presented a deta il ed report to each comm ittee member present re lati ve to this petition , certifying that it meets a ll requirements set forth by the State Enabling Legi slation and applicab le c ity ordinances , and recommended its approve!. The property in question lies in Land Lot 29 of the 14th District of Fulton, former ly Fayette County, and involves 69. l acres; of the total acrea ge, 46.6 acres is zoned A- 1 apartments; 17 acres is zoned R-3 and a sma ll er C-1 tract li es in Fulton County. Mr. G ladin e·xplained the c ity wou ld be annexing this property under the zoning most c lose ly related to the ex isting county z oning, which in this instance is practi ca ll y ide ntical to the county' s. All city services to the area are available, or can be provided upon req uest (letters to this effe ct from the appropriate city departments are included in the report) . In answer to que stioning by Mr. Summer~, Mr. Watkins stated the owners wish to come into the c ity for the services that are ava il ab le and to make their land more marketable for housing and sa le of apmtments. !l. c::i-< , . ., "'-::: 1:!. ... J Q:'. 0 0 u - -' �Minutes · Planning and Development Committee July 18, 1969 - Page Two '·...__ ... I The committee expressed its concern about a tract immediately to the north lying in unincorporated . Fulton County which, upon approval of this annexation petition, would become landlocked and asked if it could be included along with this petition. Mr. Gladin explained this is one type of problem you incur in the petition route and it could not be legally included, but could be brought up at the next filing period in May, 1970. The committee felt this would be highly desirable and should be encouraged at that time. Mr. Eugene Anderson, part-owner of the tract which would become appeared speaking for himself and Mrs. Schneider, also part-owner, be willing to have their property annexed; that, however, he could for Mr. Steinmetz, another owner, but Mr. Steinmetz had told him to be annexed. landlocked, stating they would not officially speak he would be willing In answer to questioning by Mr. Cook, Mr. Anderson stated the C-1 zoning approved by the · county was done so as part of an overall Medical Complex proposal which subsequently fel I_ through much to their regret and loss, and there is no commercial development in the area presently. There being no further discussion, the_ matter was referred to Executive Session. In Executive Session, upon unanimous vote, this petition was approved by the committee. 1 . B. PUBLIC HEARING - ANNEXATION PETITION BY JOHN E. LIVADITIS GARMON ROAD. There was no opposition present. A detailed report relative to this petition certifying its compliance with State Enabling Le gislation and app licabl e city ordinances was presented to ea ch committee member pre sent and the staff recommended approva l . The property li es in Land Lot 177 of the 17th District and is approximately 2 acres in si z e. Mr. G ladi n stated the property is presently zoned R- 1 (Reside ntial) a nd would be annexed as R-1; that all services are available, or can be provided upon request (lettersto this e ffect are a part of the report). (- ,, Mr. Li vaditis was present a long with his representative, Robert Smith . Mr . Smith acknowledged the y were aware of the fact there a re no existing sewers to the property and . the present plans are to use two septic tanks, but the y are hopeful of working out an easement agreement with the adjoi ning property owner to connect with an outfall �Minutes Planning and Development Committee July 18, 1969 - Page Three sewer 150 feet from Mr. Livaditis 1 property line. Mr. Cook called to Mr. Smith's attention a letter in the report from the Public Works Department stating that sanitary sewer is not available for the property to be annexed on Garmon Road and would not be available until approved by the property owners along this section. Mr. Smith stated they realized securing the easement would be difficult but were still hopeful it could be worked out, and in the meantime, the septic tanks are an alternative. Mr. Smith stated Mr. Livaditis is ready to begin bricking the house and doesn't have any water; since there is a charge to tap onto the water fo r property outside the city, he wanted to know if final approval of this petition by the Board of Aldermen would be expedited to relieve him from having to pay this charge. A check with the Water De partment indicated that if this committee approves the annexation peti t ion today, they would not charge Mr. Livaditis to tap onto the water prior to final approval of the petition. Messrs. Smith and Livaditis expressed their appreciation to the committee. The matter was then refe rred to Executive Session, and upon unanimous vote, this petition was approved by the committee. 2. STATUS OF RECERTIFICATION OF WORKABLE PROGRAM Pie rce Mahon y explaine d tha t the Planning staff is progressing rapidly toward completion of work fo r recerti fi ca t ion of the Wo rka ble Prog ram for a two- ye a r period, ra t he r than one ye a r which has been approve d in the past . He stated the re have bee n considerable revisi ons in the req uire me nts of the p rog ram fo r recert ification, mak ing it much more diffic ul t to pu t toge ther a nd committi ng us to a much more sol id app roach . He comme nted brie fl y on some o f the new aspe c ts of the progra m, such a s the housing and re loca ti on element and the departme nt's antici pa ted part icipa tio n in the HUD 701 p la nning p rog ra m. He explained a federa l requireme nt fo r particip ati o n in the 701 progra m is that one portion of the p lanning studies be a housing study; further, the person ne l situation throughout the city , especia lly in the te ch nica l and p rofe ssiona l leve l', is getting' serious and the Planning Department ho pe s to so lve some o f its prob lem s by hiring tempo rary personnel on 701 planning programs w ho coul d move into permanent planning vacancies as they occu r. He went on to say these new requirements, particularly housing planning fo r low and moderate income families, points up the critical need for the Urban Information System �c. Minutes Planning and Development Committee July 18, 1969 - Page Four for the city, because of the various and sundry data which can be obtained from it on immediate notice, and he urged the committee's support in implementation of this system. He presented a draft of "Workable Program Five-Year Goals II and stated the city wi II be committed to these goals and emphasized the need to begin considering an advance two-year budget. Considerable discussion then ensued about the status of the Mayor's Housing Program. Colonel Jones of the Housing Resources Committee stated that the city is about halfway through the initial five-year program. He cited figures for the two and one-half year period, stating we have under construction and completed approximately 8,000 units, and we have in the pipeline more units than the original goal of 17,000. He sta ted, however, a lot of !re units in planning are being lost because we do not have properly zoned locations to put them on. Mr. Cook asked on what basis units are classified as being in the "planning stage". C·. .• Mr. Jones explained they are put in this category when a rezoning application is filed and a proposal is submitted; if the zoning is denied, they are taken out; that more zonings for this purpose have been denied than approved. He cited the loss of 21,000 units through recent rezoning denials . Mr. Cook state d this doesn't concur with figures he obtained from the Planning Department. Mr. Gladin explained the staff analysis referre d to was done about a ye ar ago and at that time the zoning approvals were running about 80-90%; that the staff is in the process of p reparing an up-to- date analysis o{ the housing program . Mr. Cook ds ked for and was furnished with a copy of Mr. Jones' late st housing report. Afte r a cu rsory examination, Mr . Cook expressed conce rn ab out the disc repancy in fi g ures contai ned in the repo rt and those sta ted ora lly by Colone l J ones. Being a me mbe r of the Zoning Committee, he state d he was tired of charges being made that the ci ty's housing goa ls we re not be ing me t because of rez oning de nial s as he did not be li e ve this to be the case, a nd he finds it very confusing and frustating to be unable to justify his positi on whe n he is unabl e to secure re li ab le statis tics; that he would Iike statisti cs differen ti a ting wha t pe rce ntage of the 8,000 uni ts quoted by Colone l J ones is ac tually low and moderate income housi ng . Mr. Kennedy stated he ha d ve ry strong rese rvations that this perce ntage was q uite low , that as stated by Mr. G ladi n , the Plann ing staff is in the process of ana lyz ing the Housing Program for the la st two and one- ha lf years a nd he fe lt this report would produce the type statistics Mr. Cook is looking for. C. �( _ Minutes Planning and Development Committee July 18, 1969 - Page Five -: Mr. Gladin stated he realized the problems in working with the housing figures, and again this points up the need for good management procedures, which need to be standardized, and the Urban Information System for quick delivery of these statistics over a period of time. He also commented on the need for more emphasis on the city's total housing needs. Mr. Cook directed the staff to prepare a letter for his signature to Colonel Jones requesting clarification on the following: l. Is the actual number of units under construction and completed for the last two and one-half years the 8,000 oral figure given by Colonel Jones, or the 12,000 figure in his report of May 15, 1969; 2. What percentage of this figure is for low and moderate income housing; 3. The method used for determining what is low and moderate income housing, the name of the projects and the number of units in each project. He stated that in looking at the May 15 report and oral figures by Colonel Jones, it would appear we a re moving backwards and this prompted Mr. Flanigen to remark he had no doubt but what the program is "slipping". _p.?) ~ it: it 1to.~1 ' w if) ~ w n. With additi anal reference to the housing question, Mr. Mahony stated that at the last meeting of the Housing Resources Committee, the Legal Panel discussed the need for establishing a Housing Planning Agency within the city government to relieve the Housing Resources Commi t te e membe rs who are present ly spending an inord inate amount of time doing su rveys and research in the field of housing . He stated the logical place for such a housing function would be in the Planning Depa rtment, particularly in light of the 701 planning p rogram; that the staff would like the committe e's support; and he prese nted a le tter for Mr. Cook 's signa tu re as Chai rman of the Planning and De ve lopmen t Commi ttee supporting the department's position . Colone l Jo ne s sta ted tha t the Legal Panel has been studying this matter, but the y have no t subm itted a posi tion report to Mr . Ale xander a nd he does not kn ow what type of report w il I be subm it te d if and whe n it is, and he felt any action by t his committee on this matter would be pre mature a t t his ti me . ~ ~ ~ Q:: 0 0 c·-~ C!) M r. Gladin stated the letter does not request an y fina l a ction; tha t it mere ly makes a recommendation for the Ho using Re sou rces Committee t o consider in making their recommendation. Colonel Jones stated he sti II felt the letter was in anticipation of something and prematu re. �Minutes Planning and Development Committee July 18, 1969 - Page · Six Mr. Mahony commented that the Planning Deportment fee Is very strong Iy about this and consequently wanted to take a positive approach, rather than waiting for a proposal from the Housing Resources Committee and reacting. The committee unanimously approved the letter and Mr. Cook appended his signature thereto. Referring back to the status report on the Workable Program, Mr. Gladin stated the staff hopes to present the final draft to this committee July 28, 1969 for review, and will request committee approval at a meeting on August I, 1969; it will then be forwarded to the ne x t meeting of the Board of Aldermen where, hopefully, it will be finally approved and hand delivered that same afternoon to HUD. This will give HUD ample review time prior to the October expiration date for last year's recertification. *** *** ** Mr. Mahony explained the City of Mountain View, Clayton County and the City of Atlanta have common problems in the Plunkettown area which require joint study and action to solve. The following Resolution to initiate such action was approved: - (~ A RESOLUTION BY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMM! TTEE WHEREAS, the City Planning Department is presen t ly studying the Plunkettown neighbo rhood for inclusion in the Atlanta 1970 Neighbo rhood Development Program, and WHEREAS, the Plunkettown neighborhood extends south of the Atlanta City Limits i nto t he City of Mountain View and Clayton County, and WH EREAS, Clayton County, Mountain View, and the City of Atlanta face common problem s in this area . NOW, THE REF O RE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor a nd Boa rd of Alde rmen o f the City of Atlanta that Mayor Iva n Allen , J r . reque sts the Boa rd of Comm issione rs of Clayton County and the Mayor and Coun ci l of the City of Mountain View to porti cipate in a joint stud y designed to slove the probl e ms of the Plunkettown neighborhood. (~ The committee heard from Charles Stinson, President of t he Federation of South\A.Elst Clubs, a report on the first phase of the Southwest Community Study, being done for the Federation by graduate planning students from Georgia Tech. A copy of the first study phase was presented to each committee member present for information and no action was requested . �Minutes Planning and Development Committee July 18, 1969 - Page Seven ( ,; @) Mr. Gladin informed the committee members that the Sign O rdinance had been approved by the Zoning Committee and he anticipated submitting it to the full Board of Aldermen for approval Monday, July 21, 1969, and would like this committee's support at the Monday meeting. He further informed them we wi 11 be working toward recruiting personnel to implement the ordinance, that he has requested by letter that Mr. William H. Wofford, Building Official, and the Personnel Board prepare a joint study on such personnel needs. .... <>• i "'... w CJ) ** ***** Mr. Gladin stated he had received a communication from the BOND (Bass Organization for Neightorhood Development) Community req~esting to appear before the committee to discuss being included in the 1970 NDP program; that he felt they should have this opportunity and he would like authorization to notify them to appear at the next meeting of the committee. <( w 0.. aj ~ ,,. --- '- 0 0 ( In answer to Mr. Flanigen, Mr. Gladin stated the freeway ramp question in the BOND area had not been resolved, but there are continuing discussions with Ray Nixon and the State Highway Department on the matter and he felt it could be worked out. .....I ~ The committee concurred for the BOND group to appear at the next meeting. m .***** **** There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. **** Approved : Rodney1500k, Chairma n Respectfully submitted: Joanne Parks, Secreta ry @) ~ / ( '- i ... "' u.J CJ) <( (J.J a.. ,."'( - - 1 • � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document ” ®) TEAR cn iw BOORUM ® PEASE “FB — AR” a Sz bs id. & PEASE “RK BOORUM ba NN iv Planer ney July 18, 1969 A meeting of the Planning and Development Committee was held in Committee Room #2, Second Floor, City Hall, at 2:00 P. M., Friday, July 18, 1969. Committee members present: Rodney Cook, Chairman Q. V. Williamson Jack Summers John Flanigen Committee members absent: Gregory Griggs Charlie Leftwich George Cotsakis Hugh Pierce Edwin Sterne, ) Housing Authority Frank Etheridge ) The Chairman called the meeting to order and the following business was considered: 1. A. PUBLIC HEARING - ANNEXATION PETITION BY JULIUS SCHNEIDER MEDICAL FOUNDATION, INC., COLUMBUS UNION CONFERENCE ASSOCIATION OF SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST AND EUGENE A, ANDERSON. Charles Watkins, First National Bank Building, was present representing the three property owners involved. Two other persons were present in support of the annexation. There was no opposition. The staff presented a detailed report to each committee member present relative to this petition, certifying that it meets all requirements set forth by the State Enabling Legislation and applicable city ordinances, and recommended its approval. The property in question lies in Land Lot 29 of the I4th District of Fulton, formerly Fayette County, and involves 69.1 acres; of the total acreage, 46.6 acres is zoned A-1 apartments; I7 acres is zoned R-3 and a smaller C-1 tract lies in Fulton County. Mr. Gladin explained the city would be annexing this property under the zoning most closely related to the existing county zoning, which in this instance is practically identical to the county's. All city services to the area are available, or can be provided upon request (letters to this effect from the appropriate city departments are included in the report). In answer to questioning by Mr. Summers, Mr. Watkins stated the owners wish to come into the city for the services that are available and to make their land more marketable for housing and sale of apartments. Minutes Planning and Development Committee July 18, 1969 - Page Two The committee expressed its concern about a tract immediately to the north lying in unincorporated Fulton County which, upon approval of this annexation petition, would become landlocked and asked if it could be included along with this petition. Mr. Gladin explained this is one type of problem you incur in the petition route and it could not be legally included, but could be brought up at the next filing period in May, 1970. The committee felt this would be highly desirable and should be encouraged ai that time, Mr. Eugene Anderson, part-owner of the tract which would become landlocked, appeared speaking for himself and Mrs. Schneider, also part-owner, stating they would be willing to have their property annexed; that, however, he could not officially speak for Mr. Steinmetz, another owner, but Mr. Steinmetz had told him he would be willing to be annexed. In answer to questioning by Mr. Cook, Mr. Anderson stated the C-1 zoning approved by the county was done so as part of an overall Medical Complex proposal which subsequently fell through much to their regret and loss, and there is no commercial development in the area presently. There being no further discussion, the matter was referred to Executive Session. In Executive Session, upon unanimous vote, this petition was approved by the committee. KRREKEEEEEE 1. B. PUBLIC HEARING - ANNEXATION PETITION BY JOHN E. LIVADITIS - GARMON ROAD. There was no opposition present. A detailed report relative to this petition certifying its compliance with State Enabling Legislation and applicable city ordinances was presented to each committee member present and the staff recommended approval. The property lies in Land Lot I77 of the I7th District and is approximately 2 acres in size. Mr. Gladin stated the property is presently zoned R-1 (Residential) and would be annexed as R-1; that all services are available, or can be provided upon request (letfersto this effect are a part of the report). Mr. Livaditis was present along with his representative, Robert Smith. Mr. Smith acknowledged they were aware of the fact there are no existing sewers to the property and the present plans are to use two septic tanks, but they are hopeful of working out an easement agreement with the adjoining property owner to connect with an outfall a %, / ' Minutes Planning and Development Committee July 18, 1969 - Page Three sewer 150 feet from Mr. Livaditis' property line. Mr. Cook called to Mr. Smith's attention a letter in the report from the Public Works Department stating that sanitary sewer is not available for the property to be annexed on Garmon Road and would not be available until approved by the property owners along this section. Mr. Smith stated they realized securing the easement would be difficult but were still hopeful it could be worked out, and in the meantime, the septic tanks are an alternative. Mr. Smith stated Mr. Livaditis is ready to begin bricking the house and doesn't have any water; since thereis a charge to tap onto the water for property outside the city, he wanted to know if final approval of this petition by the Board of Aldermen would be expedited to relieve him from having to pay this charge. A check with the Water Department indicated that if this committee approves the annexation petition today, they would not charge Mr. Livaditis to tap onto the water prior to final approval of the petition. Messrs. Smith and Livaditis expressed their appreciation to the committee. The matter was then referred to Executive Session, and upon unanimous vote, this petition was approved by the committee. KEKKKEKEKKE o 2. STATUS OF RECERTIFICATION OF WORKABLE PROGRAM Pierce Mahony explained that the Planning staff is progressing rapidly toward completion of work for recertification of the Workable Program for a two-year period, rather than one year which has been approved in the past. He stated there have been considerable revisions in the requirements of the program for recertification, making it much more difficult to put together and committing us to a much more solid approach. He commented briefly on some of the new aspects of the program, such as the housing and relocation element and the department's anticipated participation in the HUD 70! planning program. He explained a federal requirement for participation in the 70I program is that one portion of the planning studies be a housing study; further, the personnel situation throughout the city, especially in the technical and professional level, is getting serious and the Planning Department hopes to solve some of its problems by hiring temporary personnel on 70! planning programs who could moveinto permanent planning vacancies as they occur. He went on to say these new requirements, particularly housing planning for low and moderate income families, points up the critical need for the Urban Information System Minutes | Planning and Development Committee July 18, 1969 - Page Four | for the city, because of the various and sundry data which can be obtained from it on immediate notice, and he urged the committee's support in implementation of this system. He presented a draft of "Workable Program Five-Year Goals" and stated the city will be committed to these goals and emphasized the need to begin considering an advance two-year budget. Considerable discussion then ensued about the status of the Mayor's Housing Program. Colonel Jones of the Housing Resources Committee stated that the city is about halfway through the initial five-year program. He cited figures for the two and one-half year period, stating we have under construction and completed approximately 8,000 units, and we have in the pipeline more units than the original goal of 17,000. He stated, however, a lot of the units in planning are being lost because we do not have properly zoned locations to put them on. Mr. Cook asked on what basis units are classified as being in the "planning stage". Mr. Jones explained they are put in this category when a rezoning application is filed and a proposal is submitted; if the zoning is denied, they are taken out; that more zonings for this purpose have been denied than approved. He cited the loss of 21,000 units through recent rezoning denials. Mr. Cook stated this doesn't concur with figures he obtained from the Planning Department. Mr. Gladin explained the staff analysis referred to was done about a year ago and at that time the zoning approvals were running about 80-90%; that the staff is in the process of preparing an up-to-date analysis of the housing program. Mr. Cook asked for and was furnished with a copy of Mr. Jones' latest housing report. After a cursory examination, Mr. Cook expressed concem about the discrepancy in figures contained in the report and those stated orally by Colonel Jones. Being a member of the Zoning Committee, he stated he was tired of charges being made that the city's housing goals were not being met because of rezoning denials as he did not believe this to be the case, and he finds it very confusing and frustating to be unable to justify his position when he is unable to secure reliable statistics; that he would like statistics differentiating what percentage of the 8,000 units quoted by Colonel Jones is actually low and moderate income housing. Mr. Kennedy stated he had very strong reservations that this percentage was quite low, that as stated by Mr. Gladin, the Planning staff is in the process of analyzing the Housing Program for the last two and one-half years and he felt this report would produce the type statistics Mr. Cook is looking for. ) BOORUM & PEASE “ Minutes Planning and Development Committee July 18, 1969 - Page Five Mr. Gladin stated he realized the problems in working with the housing figures, and again this points up the need for good management procedures, which need to be standardized, and the Urban Information System for quick delivery of these statistics over a period of time. He also commented on the need for more emphasis on the city's total housing needs. Mr. Cook directed the staff to prepare a letter for his signature to Colonel Jones requesting clarification on the following: 1. Is the actual number of units under construction and completed for the last two and one-half years the 8,000 oral figure given by Colonel Jones, or the 12,000 figure in his report of May 15, 1969; 2. What percentage of this figure is for low and moderate income housing; 3. The method used for determining what is low and moderate income housing, the name of the projects and the number of units in each project. He stated that in looking at the May I5 report and oral figures by Colonel Jones, it would appear we are moving backwards and this prompted Mr. Flanigen to remark he had no doubt but what the program is "slipping". With additional reference to the housing question, Mr. Mahony stated that at the last meeting of the Housing Resources Committee, the Legal Panel discussed the need for establishing a Housing Planning Agency within the city government to relieve the Housing Resources Committee members who are presently spending an inordinate amount of time doing surveys and research in the field of housing. He stated the logical place for such a housing function would be in the Planning Department, particularly in light of the 7Ol planning program; that the staff would like the committee's support; and he presented a letter for Mr. Cook's signature as Chairman of the Planning and Development Committee supporting the department's position. Colonel Jones stated that the Legal Panel has been studying this matter, but they have not submitted a position report to Mr. Alexander and he does not know what type of report will be submitted if and when if is, and he felt any action by this committee on this matter would be premature at this time. Mr. Gladin stated the letter does not request any final action; that it merely makes a recommendation for the Housing Resources Committee to consider in making their recommendation. Colonel Jones stated he still felt the letter was in anticipation of something and premature. er Minutes Planning and Development Committee July 18, 1969 - Page Six Mr. Mahony commented that the Planning Department feels very strongly about this and consequently wanted to take a positive approach, rather than waiting for a proposal from the Housing Resources Committee and reacting. The committee unanimously approved the letter and Mr. Cook appended his signature thereto. Referring back to the status report on the Workable Program, Mr. Gladin stated the staff hopes to present the final draft to this committee July 28, 1969 for review, and will request committee approval at a meeting on August |, 1969; it will then be forwarded to the next meeting of the Board of Aldermen where, hopefully, it will be finally approved and hand delivered that same afternoon to HUD. This will give HUD ample review time prior to the October expiration date for last year's recertification. REEKEKKEEEE Mr. Mahony explained the City of Mountain View, Clayton County and the City of Atlanta have common problems in the Plunkettown area which require joint study and action to solve. The following Resolution to initiate such action was approved: - A RESOLUTION BY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE WHEREAS, the City Planning Department is presently studying the Plunkettown neighborhood for inclusion in the Atlanta 1970 Neighborhood Development Program, and WHEREAS, the Plunkettown neighborhood extends south of the Atlanta City Limits into the City of Mountain View and Clayton County, and WHEREAS, Clayton County, Mountain View, and the City of Atlanta face common problems in this area. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor and Board of Aldermen of the City of Atlanta that Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr. requests the Board of Commissioners of Clayton County and the Mayor and Council of the City of Mountain View to participate in a joint study designed to slove the problems of the Plunkettown neighborhood. The committee heard from Charles Stinson, President of the Federation of Southwest Clubs, a report on the first phase of the Southwest Community Study, being done for the Federation by graduate planning students from Georgia Tech. A copy of the first study phase was presented to each committee member present for information and no action was requested. REEKKEREEE R” ® 2fE i BOORUM & PEASE “ R” ®) EASE “Note x Pt Minutes Planning and Development Committee July 18, 1969 - Page Seven Mr. Gladin informed the committee members that the Sign Ordinance had been approved by the Zoning Committee and he anticipated submitting it to the full Board of Aldermen for approval Monday, July 21, 1969, and would like this committee's support at the Monday meeting. He further informed them we will be working toward recruiting personnel to implement the ordinance, that he has requested by letter that Mr. William H. Wofford, Building Official, and the Personnel Board prepare a joint study on such personnel needs. RREKEREKER Mr. Gladin stated he had received a communication from the BOND (Bass Organization for Neighborhood Development) Community requesting to appear before the committee to discuss being included in the 1970 NDP program; that he felt they should have this opportunity and he would like authorization to notify them to appear at the next meeting of the committee. In answer to Mr. Flanigen, Mr. Gladin stated the freeway ramp question in the BOND area had not been resolved, but there are continuing discussions with Ray Nixon and the State Highway Department on the matter and he felt it could be worked out. The committee concurred for the BOND group to appear at the next meeting. RREKEEEEEEE There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. KRREKKREERESE Approved: Respectfully submitted: Rodney /Gook, Chairman Joanne Parks, Secretary  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 2, Folder 1, Document 1 Box 2 Box 2 Folder 1 Folder topic: Planning department | 1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/fe4930156952a904892684c0537c1696.pdf fbc0fed92214248d2fd3c4b4ac4a2012 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. .------ - - - - - - - - - - - -- -- - -- - --- .July 18, 1969 (',.__ A meeting of the Planning and Development Committee was held in Committee Room 2, Second Floor, City Hall, at 2 :00 P. M., Friday, July 18, 1969. @ ...... Committee members present: ~ Rodney Cook, Chairman Q. V. Williamson Jack Summers John Flanigen ~ ~ ......~~ w (/) < w Committee members absent: c· Gregory Griggs Char.li e Leftwich George Cotsakis Hugh Pierce ....!.. c~: 2: J cc 0 0 co Edwin Sterne, ) Frank Etheridge ) Housing Authority The Chairman called the meeting to order and the following business was considered: 1 I • A r-'\ • PUBLIC HEARI NG - ANN EXA. TIOI'-! PETITION BY JULIUS SCHNEIDER MEDICAL FOUNDATION, INC., COLUMBUS UNION CONFERENCE ASSOCIATION OF SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST AND EUGENE A. ANDERSON. Charl es Watkins, First National Bank Building, was present representing the three property owners involved. Two other persons were prese nt in support of the annexation. There wa s no opp:isition. @ .,.. "" ~ ·O "-111 ...... w ,£,,, (/) ( '-..._., tat'( LiJ The staff presented a deta il ed report to each comm ittee member present re lati ve to this petition , certifying that it meets a ll requirements set forth by the State Enabling Legi slation and applicab le c ity ordinances , and recommended its approve!. The property in question lies in Land Lot 29 of the 14th District of Fulton, former ly Fayette County, and involves 69. l acres; of the total acrea ge, 46.6 acres is zoned A- 1 apartments; 17 acres is zoned R-3 and a sma ll er C-1 tract li es in Fulton County. Mr. G ladin e·xplained the c ity wou ld be annexing this property under the zoning most c lose ly related to the ex isting county z oning, which in this instance is practi ca ll y ide ntical to the county' s. All city services to the area are available, or can be provided upon req uest (letters to this effe ct from the appropriate city departments are included in the report) . In answer to que stioning by Mr. Summer~, Mr. Watkins stated the owners wish to come into the c ity for the services that are ava il ab le and to make their land more marketable for housing and sa le of apmtments. !l. c::i-< , . ., "'-::: 1:!. ... J Q:'. 0 0 u - -' �Minutes · Planning and Development Committee July 18, 1969 - Page Two '·...__ ... I The committee expressed its concern about a tract immediately to the north lying in unincorporated . Fulton County which, upon approval of this annexation petition, would become landlocked and asked if it could be included along with this petition. Mr. Gladin explained this is one type of problem you incur in the petition route and it could not be legally included, but could be brought up at the next filing period in May, 1970. The committee felt this would be highly desirable and should be encouraged at that time. Mr. Eugene Anderson, part-owner of the tract which would become appeared speaking for himself and Mrs. Schneider, also part-owner, be willing to have their property annexed; that, however, he could for Mr. Steinmetz, another owner, but Mr. Steinmetz had told him to be annexed. landlocked, stating they would not officially speak he would be willing In answer to questioning by Mr. Cook, Mr. Anderson stated the C-1 zoning approved by the · county was done so as part of an overall Medical Complex proposal which subsequently fel I_ through much to their regret and loss, and there is no commercial development in the area presently. There being no further discussion, the_ matter was referred to Executive Session. In Executive Session, upon unanimous vote, this petition was approved by the committee. 1 . B. PUBLIC HEARING - ANNEXATION PETITION BY JOHN E. LIVADITIS GARMON ROAD. There was no opposition present. A detailed report relative to this petition certifying its compliance with State Enabling Le gislation and app licabl e city ordinances was presented to ea ch committee member pre sent and the staff recommended approva l . The property li es in Land Lot 177 of the 17th District and is approximately 2 acres in si z e. Mr. G ladi n stated the property is presently zoned R- 1 (Reside ntial) a nd would be annexed as R-1; that all services are available, or can be provided upon request (lettersto this e ffect are a part of the report). (- ,, Mr. Li vaditis was present a long with his representative, Robert Smith . Mr . Smith acknowledged the y were aware of the fact there a re no existing sewers to the property and . the present plans are to use two septic tanks, but the y are hopeful of working out an easement agreement with the adjoi ning property owner to connect with an outfall �Minutes Planning and Development Committee July 18, 1969 - Page Three sewer 150 feet from Mr. Livaditis 1 property line. Mr. Cook called to Mr. Smith's attention a letter in the report from the Public Works Department stating that sanitary sewer is not available for the property to be annexed on Garmon Road and would not be available until approved by the property owners along this section. Mr. Smith stated they realized securing the easement would be difficult but were still hopeful it could be worked out, and in the meantime, the septic tanks are an alternative. Mr. Smith stated Mr. Livaditis is ready to begin bricking the house and doesn't have any water; since there is a charge to tap onto the water fo r property outside the city, he wanted to know if final approval of this petition by the Board of Aldermen would be expedited to relieve him from having to pay this charge. A check with the Water De partment indicated that if this committee approves the annexation peti t ion today, they would not charge Mr. Livaditis to tap onto the water prior to final approval of the petition. Messrs. Smith and Livaditis expressed their appreciation to the committee. The matter was then refe rred to Executive Session, and upon unanimous vote, this petition was approved by the committee. 2. STATUS OF RECERTIFICATION OF WORKABLE PROGRAM Pie rce Mahon y explaine d tha t the Planning staff is progressing rapidly toward completion of work fo r recerti fi ca t ion of the Wo rka ble Prog ram for a two- ye a r period, ra t he r than one ye a r which has been approve d in the past . He stated the re have bee n considerable revisi ons in the req uire me nts of the p rog ram fo r recert ification, mak ing it much more diffic ul t to pu t toge ther a nd committi ng us to a much more sol id app roach . He comme nted brie fl y on some o f the new aspe c ts of the progra m, such a s the housing and re loca ti on element and the departme nt's antici pa ted part icipa tio n in the HUD 701 p la nning p rog ra m. He explained a federa l requireme nt fo r particip ati o n in the 701 progra m is that one portion of the p lanning studies be a housing study; further, the person ne l situation throughout the city , especia lly in the te ch nica l and p rofe ssiona l leve l', is getting' serious and the Planning Department ho pe s to so lve some o f its prob lem s by hiring tempo rary personnel on 701 planning programs w ho coul d move into permanent planning vacancies as they occu r. He went on to say these new requirements, particularly housing planning fo r low and moderate income families, points up the critical need for the Urban Information System �c. Minutes Planning and Development Committee July 18, 1969 - Page Four for the city, because of the various and sundry data which can be obtained from it on immediate notice, and he urged the committee's support in implementation of this system. He presented a draft of "Workable Program Five-Year Goals II and stated the city wi II be committed to these goals and emphasized the need to begin considering an advance two-year budget. Considerable discussion then ensued about the status of the Mayor's Housing Program. Colonel Jones of the Housing Resources Committee stated that the city is about halfway through the initial five-year program. He cited figures for the two and one-half year period, stating we have under construction and completed approximately 8,000 units, and we have in the pipeline more units than the original goal of 17,000. He sta ted, however, a lot of !re units in planning are being lost because we do not have properly zoned locations to put them on. Mr. Cook asked on what basis units are classified as being in the "planning stage". C·. .• Mr. Jones explained they are put in this category when a rezoning application is filed and a proposal is submitted; if the zoning is denied, they are taken out; that more zonings for this purpose have been denied than approved. He cited the loss of 21,000 units through recent rezoning denials . Mr. Cook state d this doesn't concur with figures he obtained from the Planning Department. Mr. Gladin explained the staff analysis referre d to was done about a ye ar ago and at that time the zoning approvals were running about 80-90%; that the staff is in the process of p reparing an up-to- date analysis o{ the housing program . Mr. Cook ds ked for and was furnished with a copy of Mr. Jones' late st housing report. Afte r a cu rsory examination, Mr . Cook expressed conce rn ab out the disc repancy in fi g ures contai ned in the repo rt and those sta ted ora lly by Colone l J ones. Being a me mbe r of the Zoning Committee, he state d he was tired of charges being made that the ci ty's housing goa ls we re not be ing me t because of rez oning de nial s as he did not be li e ve this to be the case, a nd he finds it very confusing and frustating to be unable to justify his positi on whe n he is unabl e to secure re li ab le statis tics; that he would Iike statisti cs differen ti a ting wha t pe rce ntage of the 8,000 uni ts quoted by Colone l J ones is ac tually low and moderate income housi ng . Mr. Kennedy stated he ha d ve ry strong rese rvations that this perce ntage was q uite low , that as stated by Mr. G ladi n , the Plann ing staff is in the process of ana lyz ing the Housing Program for the la st two and one- ha lf years a nd he fe lt this report would produce the type statistics Mr. Cook is looking for. C. �( _ Minutes Planning and Development Committee July 18, 1969 - Page Five -: Mr. Gladin stated he realized the problems in working with the housing figures, and again this points up the need for good management procedures, which need to be standardized, and the Urban Information System for quick delivery of these statistics over a period of time. He also commented on the need for more emphasis on the city's total housing needs. Mr. Cook directed the staff to prepare a letter for his signature to Colonel Jones requesting clarification on the following: l. Is the actual number of units under construction and completed for the last two and one-half years the 8,000 oral figure given by Colonel Jones, or the 12,000 figure in his report of May 15, 1969; 2. What percentage of this figure is for low and moderate income housing; 3. The method used for determining what is low and moderate income housing, the name of the projects and the number of units in each project. He stated that in looking at the May 15 report and oral figures by Colonel Jones, it would appear we a re moving backwards and this prompted Mr. Flanigen to remark he had no doubt but what the program is "slipping". _p.?) ~ it: it 1to.~1 ' w if) ~ w n. With additi anal reference to the housing question, Mr. Mahony stated that at the last meeting of the Housing Resources Committee, the Legal Panel discussed the need for establishing a Housing Planning Agency within the city government to relieve the Housing Resources Commi t te e membe rs who are present ly spending an inord inate amount of time doing su rveys and research in the field of housing . He stated the logical place for such a housing function would be in the Planning Depa rtment, particularly in light of the 701 planning p rogram; that the staff would like the committe e's support; and he prese nted a le tter for Mr. Cook 's signa tu re as Chai rman of the Planning and De ve lopmen t Commi ttee supporting the department's position . Colone l Jo ne s sta ted tha t the Legal Panel has been studying this matter, but the y have no t subm itted a posi tion report to Mr . Ale xander a nd he does not kn ow what type of report w il I be subm it te d if and whe n it is, and he felt any action by t his committee on this matter would be pre mature a t t his ti me . ~ ~ ~ Q:: 0 0 c·-~ C!) M r. Gladin stated the letter does not request an y fina l a ction; tha t it mere ly makes a recommendation for the Ho using Re sou rces Committee t o consider in making their recommendation. Colonel Jones stated he sti II felt the letter was in anticipation of something and prematu re. �Minutes Planning and Development Committee July 18, 1969 - Page · Six Mr. Mahony commented that the Planning Deportment fee Is very strong Iy about this and consequently wanted to take a positive approach, rather than waiting for a proposal from the Housing Resources Committee and reacting. The committee unanimously approved the letter and Mr. Cook appended his signature thereto. Referring back to the status report on the Workable Program, Mr. Gladin stated the staff hopes to present the final draft to this committee July 28, 1969 for review, and will request committee approval at a meeting on August I, 1969; it will then be forwarded to the ne x t meeting of the Board of Aldermen where, hopefully, it will be finally approved and hand delivered that same afternoon to HUD. This will give HUD ample review time prior to the October expiration date for last year's recertification. *** *** ** Mr. Mahony explained the City of Mountain View, Clayton County and the City of Atlanta have common problems in the Plunkettown area which require joint study and action to solve. The following Resolution to initiate such action was approved: - (~ A RESOLUTION BY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMM! TTEE WHEREAS, the City Planning Department is presen t ly studying the Plunkettown neighbo rhood for inclusion in the Atlanta 1970 Neighbo rhood Development Program, and WHEREAS, the Plunkettown neighborhood extends south of the Atlanta City Limits i nto t he City of Mountain View and Clayton County, and WH EREAS, Clayton County, Mountain View, and the City of Atlanta face common problem s in this area . NOW, THE REF O RE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor a nd Boa rd of Alde rmen o f the City of Atlanta that Mayor Iva n Allen , J r . reque sts the Boa rd of Comm issione rs of Clayton County and the Mayor and Coun ci l of the City of Mountain View to porti cipate in a joint stud y designed to slove the probl e ms of the Plunkettown neighborhood. (~ The committee heard from Charles Stinson, President of t he Federation of South\A.Elst Clubs, a report on the first phase of the Southwest Community Study, being done for the Federation by graduate planning students from Georgia Tech. A copy of the first study phase was presented to each committee member present for information and no action was requested . �Minutes Planning and Development Committee July 18, 1969 - Page Seven ( ,; @) Mr. Gladin informed the committee members that the Sign O rdinance had been approved by the Zoning Committee and he anticipated submitting it to the full Board of Aldermen for approval Monday, July 21, 1969, and would like this committee's support at the Monday meeting. He further informed them we wi 11 be working toward recruiting personnel to implement the ordinance, that he has requested by letter that Mr. William H. Wofford, Building Official, and the Personnel Board prepare a joint study on such personnel needs. .... <>• i "'... w CJ) ** ***** Mr. Gladin stated he had received a communication from the BOND (Bass Organization for Neightorhood Development) Community req~esting to appear before the committee to discuss being included in the 1970 NDP program; that he felt they should have this opportunity and he would like authorization to notify them to appear at the next meeting of the committee. <( w 0.. aj ~ ,,. --- '- 0 0 ( In answer to Mr. Flanigen, Mr. Gladin stated the freeway ramp question in the BOND area had not been resolved, but there are continuing discussions with Ray Nixon and the State Highway Department on the matter and he felt it could be worked out. .....I ~ The committee concurred for the BOND group to appear at the next meeting. m .***** **** There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. **** Approved : Rodney1500k, Chairma n Respectfully submitted: Joanne Parks, Secreta ry @) ~ / ( '- i ... "' u.J CJ) <( (J.J a.. ,."'( - - 1 • �·J AGENDA ZONING C0r1MITTEE Meeting, Thursday, July 24, 1969 Aldermanic Chamber, Second Floor , Ci ty Hall, 2:00 P. M. 1/U-69-34-S An Application f or a Special Use Permit for a church to be located at MACON DRIVE, f ronting 40 feet on the east side of Macon Dri ve, S.W., beginning 31 6 .5 f e~t north from the corner of Bromack Drive, S.W. Depth appro x i ma t ely 624 feet. Land Lot 70, 14th Di strict, Fulton County, Georgia. Mrs . Thelma Lois Mo r gan, Owner New Hope Baptist Church - Appl i cant Propos ed Use - Church (Planning Board, adverse r ecommenda t ion) WARD 4 iffaZ-69 - 93-S An Ordi nance to r e zone from A-1-C (Apartme nt-Conditional) Di strict to C-1 (Commerc i al) Di s tr i ct, prop ert y located at the Northeast corne r of OLD HAPEVILLE ROAD a nd CLEVELAND AVENUE , S. W., fronting 200 f ee t on the nor th s ide o f Cleve l a nd Avenue, S .W., beg inning 0 fe e t fro m t he nor theast c orne r of Old Hapeville Ro a d. Depth 456 fe e t . Are a 92,00 0 square fe e t. Land Lot 69, 14th Di strict, Fulton County, Georgi a . · Dr . Rob e rt B. Hodgson, Owner-App l i cant Proposed Us e - Off ice & Se rv i c e Sta tion (Plann i ng Boa r d, advers e r e commend ation) WARD 4 iffaZ-69-91 - S An Or d i na nc e t o re zone from R- 4 (Re si dential) District to A-1 - C (Apart me nt- Conditiona l) Di s trict , pro perty loca t ed at 2965 BROHNS MI LL ROAD, S .E. , fr onti ng 78 . 2 f e et on the west s i de of Browns Mi l l Road , begi nni ng 930 fe e t fro m the s out hwest corne r of Spri ngside Dr i ve . De pth 1,024 feet . Area approximat~ly 78 ,0 00 square fe et . La nd Lot 61 , 14th Di stri c t, Fulton County , Georgi a. William T. St anfie ld , Owne r Robert A. Young - Appli c a nt Proposed Us e - Apartment s WARD 4 (Planning Board, adverse r.e commendat_i on) · An Ordinance to rez one fr om R-4 (Residential )D i s tr i c t to A-1 (Apar t ment) Di strict, property lo cated at 311 6 BROHNS MILL ROAD , f r on ti ng 251. 5 feet on t he northeast side o f Browns Mill Road , beg inning 500 . 7 feet from the no r theast co r ner of Humph r ies Dr ive . Depth va r ie s . _Area 23 . 3 ac r e s . Land Lot s 35 & 62 , 14t h Di s t r i ct , Fult on County , Georg i a . Ruby All e ne Brooks & W. T . Atkinso n, Owne r s B &. H Compa ny - Applican t Propo s ed Us e - Apa rt me nt s (Planning Board, adve r s e recomme ndati on) WARD 4 1/Z- 69-89-S �ZONING COMMITTEE AGENDA Page· 2 July 24, 1969 ifrZ-69-84-s ·An Ordinance to rezone from A-1 (Apartment) Di strict to C-1 (Commercial) District, property located at J ONESBORO ROAD, fronting 652.5 feet on the southwesterly side of Jonesboro Road, beginn i ng 707.06 feet f ro m the southwe st corner of Macedonia Road. Depth 1048.43 feet. Area 16.4 acres . La nd Lot 34, 14th District , Fulton County, Georgia. The Mi litary Corpo r ation, Owner Theodore G. Frankel - Applicant Proposed Use - Shopp i ng Center & Office Park (Planning Board, favor able recommendation as amended to C-1-C) WARD 4 ifZ-69-80-S An Or dinance to r e zone f rom R-4 (Re s i dent ia l) District to A-2 (Apartment) District, property loca ted at 2946 & 2954 HAPEVILLE ROAD, S.H. , f r onting 192 feet on the east side of Ha pevi lle Road, S. W. , beginning 389 fe e t from the northeast corner of Mt. Zi on Road. Dep th 293.4 f eet . Ar ea 56,208 s quar e fee t. La nd Lot 68 , 14 th Di st rict , Ful to n County , Georgi a . Benj ami n F . Ma rti n, Owner-App lica nt Pr opo sed Use - Apartme nts (Planning Boar d, adverse recomme ndation) WARD 4 !IU- 69- 30- S An Applica t io n fo r a Spe c ia l Us e Permi t fo r a Day Nur s ery to be located at 3825 ADAMSVILLE DRIVE, S.W. , fronting 100 f ee t on the no rth s i de of Adams vi lle Dr i ve, S.W . , begi nni ng 393 . 7 fe e t east f rom the cor ner o f Woodstock Drive. Depth 200 feet. La nd Lot 14 , 14th FF Dis t ric t , Fulton Count y, Georgi a. Emma Hunt (Renfroe), Owner Doris Stri ck land - App l icant Pr opos ed Us e - Day Nu rsery (Planning Board, favor able r ecommendation) WARD 7 U-69-31-C An App l i cat io n f o r a Spe c i al Us e Permi t f or a Nur sing Home to be located at 120 LINE ROAD, S. W. , fr onting 252 feet o n the e ast side of Li ne Roa d, be ginni ng 680 f eet no r th from the co r ner o f Br anch Dr ive. D~pth 698 fe et. Land L6t 13, · 14 t h Dis t ric t , Ful t on County , Georgia ABDEC , I nc . , Owner- Appl icant Propos ed Use - Nursi ng home (Pla nning Boar d, favorable r ecomme ndation) WARD 7 Z- 69 - 85 - S An Or dinance to rezone from R-5 (Res ident ial) and A- 1 (Apartment) Di s t r icts to C- 1 (Commercial) Di stri ct, prope rty l ocate d at STEWART AVENUE, fronting 131 fe et on t he e a s t s ide of Stewart Avenue , b egi nning O feet from t he north c orner o f Grant Stree t . Depth 218 feet . Area 14,25& swuare f eet . La nd Lot 90, 14t h Dist r i ct, Fulton County, Georgia . Carrie Blake, Ow ner C. M. Mcche s ney ,- Appl i ca nt Proposed Use - Service Station WARD 4 (Planning Board , favorab l e recommendation) �ZONING.COMMITTEE AGENDA Page 3 July 24, 1969 ffaZ-69-83-S An Ordinance to rezone from R-3 (Residential) District to C-1 (Commercial) District, property located at 1955 CAMPBELLTON ROAD, fronting 260.7 feet on the north side of Campbellton Road, beginning O feet from the northeast corner of Honeysuckle Lane. Depth 212.1 feet. Area approximately 66,000 square feet. Land Lot 168, 14th District, Fulton County, Georgia. Perry Boulevard, Inc., Owner-Applicant Proposed Use - Service Station (Planning Board, favorable recommendation) WARD 7 ffaZ-69-94-S An Ordinance to rezone from C-L (Commercial-Limited) District to C-1 (Commercial) District, property located at 2860 CAMPBELLTON ROAD, S.W., fronting 120 feet on the south side o f Campbe llton Road, beginning 293 feet from the east corner of Naxwe ll Drive. Dep th 340 feet. Area 33,000+ · square feet. Land Lot 218, 14th D~strict, Fulton County, Georgia. Ellis Maloof, Owner-Applicant Proposed Use - Car Wash (Planning Board, favorable recomme ndat i on) WARD 7 ffaU-69-33-S An Application for a Specia l Use Permit for a Car Wash and Service Station, to . be located at 2360 CAMPBELLTON ROAD, S .H., fronting 120 feet on the south side of Campbel lton Road , beginning 293 f ee t east fro1:1 the corne r of Maxwe ll Drive. Depth 340 feet. Land Lot 218 , 14th Di s trict, Fulton County, Georgia. Ellis Maloo f, Owner-Appli ca nt Proposed Use - Car Wash & Servi ce Station (Planning Board , favo rab l e recommendation) WARD 7 Z-69-96-S An Ordi nance to re zone from R-4 (Residential) Di5trict to A-1 (Apartme nt) District, p r operty located at FAIRBURN ROAD, S.W., fronting 100 feet on the west side o f Fairburn Road, beginning 720 feet ,ram the . south ~orne r of . qarrison Drive . De pth 800± feet. Area 236,013 square feet. Land Lot 8, 14th FF District, Ful ton County, Georgia. D. E. Norr is, Owner E. Lane Brown-Applicant Proposed Use - Apartments (Planning Board, adverse recommendation) WARD 7 �AGENDA ATLANTA-FULTON COUNTY --JOINT PLANNING BOARD Meeting, Wednesday, November 12,1969 Committee Room #2, Second Floor, City Hall, 2:00 P.M. i!Z-69-154-N An Ordinance to rezone from R-4 (Residential) District to C-1 (Corranercial) District property located at 1265 BOULDERCREST DRIVE, S.E., fronting 231 feet on the West side of Bouldercrest Drive, beginning 175 feet from the northwest corner of Eastland Road. Depth 175 feet. Area 40,425 squ are feet. Land Lot 143, 15th District, DeKalb County, Georgia. Alford M. Williams & Ellis A. Maloof, Owner Ellis A. Maloof, Applicant Proposed Use - Foor store & dry cleaners WARD 2 i!U-69-68-N A~ Application f or a Special Us e Per mi t for a Chu~ch to be locate d at 1323 S. PONCE DE LEON AVE NUE , N. E., f ronting 182 feet on t he south side of Ponce de Leon Ave., N.E. beginning O fe et east from the corner of Springdale Road, N.E. Depth 240.4 feet. Land Lot 241, 15th District DeKabl County, Georgia. Elmer D. Lill ey, Owner Church of God of Prophe cy, Applicant Proposed Use - Church WARD 2 i!U-69-65-N An Application for a Special Use Permit for a Dent a l Fr a t ernity-Boarding House, to be located at 1315 PONCE DE LEON AVENUE N.E., f r cnt ing 15 2 . 4 fee t e n t he s outh side cf Ponce de Le on Avenue, beg i nning 170 feet wes t f rom the corner o f Springda l e Road. Dep th 220 fee t. Land Lot 241, 15th District, DeKalb County, Georgia. Delta Sigma Delta House, Inc., Owner Cliffor d Ox f ord , App l ican t Proposed Use - Dental Fra ter ni ty - Boarding House WARD 2 ( i!Z - 69 - 172 - C) An Oi dinance to r ezone f r om A- 2 (Apar tment) Dis t rict t o C- 1 (Commercial) Di s t rict proper t y located at 493,497 , _ 503,507 EAST AVENUE and 298 , 302 1 304 ~.ACKENZIE , fronting 180 f e e t on t he s outh s ide of East Avenue, begi nning 210 fee t f r om t he s outheast corner o f Bou levard . Depth 30 .5 fe et . Area 1 . 30 acres. Land Lot 46, 14th District , Fulton County, Georgia. Caduceus Properties, Owner Carl Cofer , Applicant Propos ed Us e - Park i ng Lot WARD 6 �ATLANTA-FULTON COUNTY JOINT PLANNING BOARD Wednesday, November 12 1 1969 - Page 2 /FU-69-66-G An Application f-0r a Special Use Permit for an Apartment above a store, to be located at 979 PIEDMONT AVENUE, N.E. fronting 45 feet on the easterly side of Piedmont Avenue, N.E., beginning 92.8 feet southwest from the corner of Tenth Street, N.E. Depth 175 feet. Land Lot 106, 17th District, Fulton County, Georgia. Augusto Silva, Owner-Applicant Proposed Use - Apartment WARD 5 f!U-69-69-C An Application for a Special Use Permit for Parking to be located at 1230 & 1236 PIEDMONT AVENUE, N.E.,fronting 236.7 feet on the northwest side of Piedmont Avenue, beginning 250.5 feet southwest from·the corner of South Prado, Depth approximately 160 feet. Land Lot 55, 17th District, Fulton County, Georgia. Morton Realty Company, Owner,Applicant Proposed Use - Parking WARD 5 f!Z-69-174-N An Ordinance to rezone from R-3 (Residential) District to 0-I (Office-Institutional) District, property located at 3783 ROSWELL ROAD, N.E., fronting 202 feet on the east side of Roswell Road, N.E., beginning 2,257.5 feet form the northeast corner of Ivy Road. Depth 835 feet. Area 70,700 square feet. Land Lot 97, 17th District, Fulton County, Geor gi a, Jeannette M. Prince, Owner,Applicant Proposed Use - Office & Apartments WARD 8 f!Z-69-183-N An Ordinance to rezone from R-4 (Residential) District to C-1 (Connnercial) District, property located at 2114 thru 2126 DEFOORS FERRY ROAD, front _ing 633 feet on the south side of DeFoors Ferry Road, beginning 698 feet from the northwest corner of Collier Road. Depth 422 feet. Area 174,428 square feet, Land Lots 185,186,&194, 17th District Fulton County, Georgia. H.W. Dunn, et al, Owner Initiated by Alderman G. Everett Millican Proposed Use - Service Station/Retail Uses WARD 3 f!Z-69-169-S An Ordinance to rezone from R-4 · (Residential) District to A-1 (Apartment) District, property located at 2905 SPRING DALE ROAD, fronting 206 feet on the west side of Springdale Road, beginning 990,7 feet from the southwest corner of S. Fredell Circle. Depth 665 feet. Area 3.7 acres. Land Lot 100, 14th District, Fulton County, Georgia, William H. Cook, Owner-Applicant Proposed Use - Apartments WARD 4 �ATLANTA-F1JLTON COUNTY JOINT PLANNING BOARD Wednesday, November 12, 1969 - Page 3 Z-69-175-C Z-69-176-C An Ordinance to rezon~ from R-9 (Townhouse) District to C-1 (Commerc~al) District, property located at PEYTON ROAD, fronting 325.0 feet on the east side of Peyton Road, beginning 340 feet from the southeast corner of Gordon Road. Depth 165.8 feet. Area 1.265± acres. Land Lot 205, 14th District, Fulton County, Georgia. Peyton Center, Inc., Ovmer - Applicant Proposed Use - Not stated WARD 7 An Ordinance to rezone from R-3 (Residential) District to A-L (Apartment-Limited) District, property located at LYNHURST DRIVE, fronting 381.09 feet on the west side of Lynhurst Drive, beginning 595.9 feet from the northwest corner of Hiawasee Drive. Depth 1,485± feet. Area 22.72 acres. Land Lot 236, 14th District, Fulton County, Georgia, R.T. Griffith, Owner - Applicant Pr.oposed Use - Apartments WARD 7 Z-69-171-C An Ordinance t6 rezone form R-5 (Residential) District to & 3401 SCOTT ST., S,W., fronting 497.3 feet on the North side of Scott Street, beginning O feet from the northeast cor ner of Brownlee Road. Depth 100 feet. Area 1.01 acres. Land Lot 245, 14th District, Fulton County, Georgia. Therori & Jackie Bolton, Owner Theron Bolton, Applicant Proposed Use - Apartments WARD 7 A-1 (Apartment) District, property located at 3335 Z-69-180-C An Ordinance to rezone from R-5 (Residential) Di s tr i ct to A-1 (Ap ar tmen t ) Di s trict, prop erty loc a t ed at SEWELL ROAD s.w., f r onting 570,2 fee t on the north s id e o f Sewell Road, beginning 1450 fee t from the nor theas t cor ne r o f Fairbur n Road. Depth 1,930 feet. Area 74.3 acre s. Land Lot 245, 14th District, Fulton County , Ge orgia. Blaclock Machinery, Owner Thornton Properti es , I nc., App l i cant Propo sed Us e - Apartments WAR,D 7 Z-69-178-S An Or di nance t o rezone from A- 1- C (Apartment -Conditional ) Distr i ct to C- 1 (Conuner cial) Distri ct, property lo cated at 2440 FAIRBUR~ ROAD , s. w., f r onti ng 60 feet on the east side o f Fai rbur n Road . S.W. , beginni ng 104 9 fe e t from the southe a s t corner of Campbellton Road, S .W ., Depth 792 fe e t. Area 4 a cres. Land Lot 5, 14th District , Fulton County, Georgia. Maude H. Wai ts , Owner David D. Warren, Applicant Proposed Use - Office Building WARD 7 �ATLANTA-FULTON COUNTY JOINT PLANNING BOARD Wednesday, November 12, 1969 - Page 4 ifZ-69-170-C An Ordinance to rezone for ·R-3 (Residential) District to C-1 (Commercial) District, property .1 .ocated at ADAMSVILLE DRIVE, S.W.,fronting 100 feet on the south side of Adamsville Drive, beginning 152 feet from the southwest corner of Gordon Road. Depth 197 feet. Area 25,672 square feet. Land Lot 14, 14th District, Fulton County, Georgia. J.I. Kingloff & Mildred L. Kingloff, Owner-Applicant Proposed Use - Not stated WARD 7 Z-69-177-C An Ordinance to rezone from R-5 (Residential) District to A-1 (Apartment) District, property located at 125 FAIRBURN ROAD, N.W., fronting 102.8 feet on the east side of Fairburn Road, beginning 811.9 feet from the northeast corner of Gordon Road. Depth 838.2 feet. Area 3.611 acres. Land Lot 243, 14th Distr ict, Fulton County, Georgia. Rosa G. Washington, Owner Kfng & Spalding, Applicant Proposed Use - Apartments WARD 7 fFU-69-67-C An Application for a Special Use Permit for a Day Care to be located at 633 HIGHTOWER ROAD, N.E., fronting 50 on the east side of Hightower Road, beginning 515 feet from the corner of Oldknow Drive. Depth 196.4 feet Lot 208, 14th District, Fulton County, Georgia. Mrs. Julie C. Ogletree, Owner-Applicant . WARD Proposed Use - Day Care Center 4/Z-69-179-C Center feet north Land 3 An Ordinance to rezone from R-5 (Residential) District to C-1 (Commercial) Di strict, property located at 2138 ,2098 & 2094 BANKHEAD HIGHWAY, fronting 75 & 133 feet on t he south side of Bankhe ad Highway, beginning O & 330 f ee t from the southeast corner of Alta Place. Depth 243 feet. Area 50,544 square feet. Land Lot 176, 14th District, Fulton County, Georgia. Initiated by Zoning Committee Proposed Use - Not stated WARD 3 �.) CITY OF .ATLANTA May 29, 1969 CITY HALL ATLANTA, GA. 30303 Tel. 522-4463 Area Code 404 DE PARTMENT OF PLANNING COLLIER B. GLADIN, Dir e c cor Mr. Johnny Robinson Community Development Coordinator Mayor•s Office City Hall Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Dear Johnny: Certification of Atlanta 1s Workable Program for Community Improvement expires on October I, 1969. The U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development requires that we make our submission by August I, 60 days in advance of the expiration date . Last year, we made our submission on time; we wou Id Iike to repeat the performance th is year . We are enclosing a copy of the newly revised Workable Program for Community Improvement HUD Handbook along with those portions of the Wo rkab le Program that pertain to your operation . Please note the changed requirements in the HUD Handbook . All Workable Program certifications have bee n ex tended over a two - yea r pe riod . The City of Atlanta will not submit another Wo rkable Program until 1971 . Therefore, we ask that you make su re you maintain th e required data pertaining to your depa rtment on a two- yea r basis. The report ing period for the Ju ne 31 Workable Prog ram for th is year is March 31, 1968 to June I, 1969. The Planning Department wi II be g la d to assi st you in any way possib le to get the wo rk done on time. At least a month 1s time is needed by us for assemb li ng exhibits, typing and re producing and generally tying up loose ends . Therefore, we must have the sections back by June 16. Sincerely yours , ~ Colli e r B. G ladin Planning Di rector CBG/bls Enclosure �·I I RH A 7100.1 ) • 0 l ROGR FOR COM U ITV I -PR Octo be r 1968 A HUD H D 00 U . S. DEPARTME N T OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT WASH I NGTON , D. C. 204 10 �• PREFACE FOR WORKABLE PROGRAM HANDBOOK 'Ihis Handbook sets forth a new approach and revised requirements to guide localities that are carrying out a Workable Program for Community Improvement. It represents the first major revision of the Workable Program procedures since enactment of the statutory provision in 1954-, We have several objectives which we hope will be achieved by the revision. One is to respond to the many changes that have taken place in our urban areas over the years. Another is to ensure that our requirements for the Workable Program are focused on performance by localities in dealing with the problem of slums and blight~-not just on compliance with operational procedures. Above all, the purpose is to give local communities both flexibility an4 the responsibility to develop effective programs to achieve the objectives of the statute in light of the particular nature of problems and conditions existing in each locality. ' ' '.Ihe substitution of performance standards for certain formal elements of the Workable Program does not represent any easing in current substantive requi rements. Nor does the Handbook envision any reduction in efforts by communities now participating in the program. The introduction of a performance-oriented approach hopefully will result in a more effective attack on the major problems facing the community. I am confident that, after more than a decade of experience with the Workable Program, the Federal-local partnership has the maturity to operate effectively under the new approach of this Handbook and thereby we can make more meaningful progress toward overcoming the urgent problems facing our cities and towns today. Robert C. Weaver Secretary 1 11/ 68 �WORKABLE PRCGRAM FOR COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT RHA 7100.11 • FOREWORD This Handbook sets forth revised policies, requirements, and procedures for communities required to carry out a Workable Program for Community Improvement in connection with the use of certain Departmental housing and renewal programs to help overcome probiems of slums and blight. -Workable Program Guides containing illustrative and advisory information will be issued to supplement this Handbook. The revised policies and requirements set forth herein are effective upon issuance of this Handbook. Tnose communities which already have submitted or· have substantially completed documentation in support of an application for certification or recertification of a Workable Program need not revise the material . However, communities may use the revised forms described in this Handbook immediately . After March 31, 1969, all applications for certification or recertification of a Workable Program must be in conformance with the revised policies and requirements. The primary objective of the revision is to provide a fle:x:i.ble and performance-oriented framework within which communities may demonstrate reasonable continuing progress toward· achieving the goals sought by the statutory requirement for a Workable Program and those established by the community to implement them. The revision also modifies reporting and documenta~ion requirements and provides new criteria for evaluating community performance. The revised Workable Program concentrates on four essential areas: a. The · adoption and enforcement of housing, building, and related codes. b. The establishment of an effective action-oriented planning and programming process. c. The developnent of programs to meet low- and moderate- income housing needs and to meet relocation needs of families , individuals, and business concerns displaced by governmental action. ii 11/68 �WORKABLE PROGRAM FOR COMMUNI'IY IMPROVEMENT • IRHA 7100.1 d. I The involvement of citizens, including poor and minority groups, in Workable Program activities and in related HUDassisted housing and renewal programs. The intent of this Handbook is to strengthen the Workable Program as a flexible and meaningful tool to help communities organize and carry out its community improvement programs. The Handbook envisions no lessening of effort by communities which h~ve been participating under previous Workable Program guidelines. Rather, it is anticipated that communities will make greater :grogress toward achieving the obj ectives of the statute with the increased flexibility provided by the Handbook to concentrate local efforts and tailor specific needs and problems facing the community. Applications for certtfic?tion in accordance with the requirements of this Handbook which propose a program with an overall leve l of effort below that made in the past, will not be acceptable. Certifications and recertifications of Workable Programs will be e ffective for two years. Field reviews of progress will be made as necessary by HUD Regional Office staff midway through the certification period to provide advice and t echnical assistance. HUD-assisted programs to which the Workable Program applies are listed in Chapter 1, paragraph 5. A community intending to make application for financial assistance under any of these pro grams should become familiar with the policies and requirement s set forth in this Handbook. An understanding of these policies and requirements will facilitate the preparation of the application for certification or recertification of the community 's Workable Program and thus help to expedite the processing of applications for financial assistance for specific programs. 10/ 68 iii �J - HtJD REGIONAL OFFICES RIDIONAL ADMINISTRATOR ADDRESS AND TELEPHONE NUMBER I Judah Gribetz 26 Federal Plaza, New York, N.Y. 10007 Area Code 212 264-8068 Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode· Island, Vermont n Warren P. Phelan Widener Bldg., 1339 Chestnut St., Philadelphia, Pa. Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland, New Jersey, Pennsylvania Virginia, West Virginia RIDION 19107 GENER.AL JURISDICTIONAL AREA Area Code 215 597-2560 III Edward H. Baxter Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee ~ 0 ..... < e:: Peachtree-Seventh Bldg., Atlanta, Ga. 3032~ Area Code 404 526-5585 ~ ~ >tj IT Francis D. Fi.sher 360 North Michigan Ave., Chicago, Ill. 60601 Area Code 312 353-5680 Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio,. South Dakota, Wisconsin V W.W. Collins Federal Office Bldg., 819 Taylor St., Fort Worth, Texas 76102 Area Code 817 334-2867 Arkansas, Colorado, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas 450 Golden Gate Ave., Post Office Box 36003, San Francisco, Calif. 94102 Area Code 415 556-4752 Alaska, Arizona, California, Guam, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Washington, Wyoming x:, Q ' VI I-' ~ VII co °' Robert B. Pitts Jose E. Febres-Silva Post Office Box 3869, GPO, San Juan, P.R. 00936 (Dial Long Distance Operator) Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands ~ x:, 0 0 ~z H 1-3 1-<1 ~ ~~ -.J I-' 0 0 •I-' <: 1-3 767-1515 V ·-· �WORKABLE PROGRAM FOR COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT I • RHA 7100.11 TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE FOREWORD HUD REGIONAL OFFICES CHAPTER 1. SUMMARY OF WORKABLE PROGRAM PURPOSES AND REQUIREMENT Paragraph 1. Statutory Provision · 2. Basic Purpose of Statutory Provision 3, Summary of Workable Program Requirements Local Administrative Requirements 5- \ HUD-Assisted Pro grams for Which Workable Pro gram Is A Requirement CHAPTER 2. .., GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATION OF WORKABLE PROGRAM APPLICATIONS 1. General Principles of Administration 2. Requirements for Application Content 3. Criteria for Evaluation of Workable Program Application 4. Basis for Determining Acceptability CHAPTER 3. ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS AND PROCEDURES FOR WORKABLE PROGRAM CER TIFICATION 1. Filing of Application for Certification 2. Governing Body Approval of the Workable Program 3. Notification of Approval or Disapproval. 4. Certification Period 5. Certification Lapse 6. Technical Assistance to Communities V 11/68 �WORK.ABLE PROGRAM FOR COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT I RHA 7100.1 " I ,I Paragraph 7. Relationship of Workable Program and Urban Renewal Requirements 8. Availability of Workable Program as Public Document 9. Guides CHAPTER 4. CODES AND CODE ENFORCEMENT 1. Statutory Provision 2. Requirements for Code Adoption 3. Rehabilitation Standards 4.·..> , Requi rements for Code Enfor cement 5. Examples of Priority Areas 6. Considerat i ons Relate d to ·code Enforcement CHAPTER 5. PLANNING AND PROGRAMMI NG 1. Planning and Programming Objectives 2. Comprehens ive Planning Requirements 3. Programming Requireme nts 4. Charact er i stic s of Planning Process 5. Summary CHAPTER 6. HOUSING AND RELOCATION 1. Gen~ral Provisions 2. Relocation Requirements 3. Housing Requ i rements 4. Crite~ia for Evaluation of Applications CHAPTER 7. 1. 11/ 68 CITIZEN I NVOLVEMENT Requirements f or Citizen Involvement Vi -- ---. ' �WORKABLE PROGRAM FOR COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT RHA 7100.11 Paragraph 2. Principles and Purposes of Citizen Involvement 3. Examples of Citizen Involvement Activities 4. Criteria for Evaluation of Applications CHAPTER 8. GUIDELINES FOR WORKABLE PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION FOR SMALL COMMUNITIES 1. General Provisions 2. Special Provisions 3. Criteria for Review and Evaluation of Workable Program Application V , CHAPTER 9, ' ~- GUIDELINES FOR WORKABLE PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION FOR INDIAN RESERVATIONS 1. General Provision.§ , 2. Special Obj ectives 3, General Criteria for Review and Evaluation of Applications 4. Provision for Code Adoption and Enforcement 5, Planning Provisions 6. Housing and Relocation Provisions 7, Citizen Involvement Provisions vii 10/68 �I WORKABLE PROGRAM FOR COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT " R1!A 7100.1] CHAPTER 1 CHAPTER 1. 1. SUMMARY OF WORKABLE PROGRAM PURPOSES AND REQUIREMENTS STATU'IORY PROVISION. The Housing Act of 1949, as amended, requires as a condition of certain financial assistance, the following: 11 ••• a workable program for co~unity improvement (which shall include an official plan of action, as it exists from time to time, for effectively dealing with the problem of urban slums and blight within the community and for the establishment and preservation of a well-planned community with well-organized environment for adequate family life) for utilizing appropriate private and public resources to eliminate and prevent the develoµnent or spread of slums and urban blight, to encourage needed urban rehabilitation, to provide for redevelopnent of blighted, deteriorated, or slum areas, or to undertake such of the aforesaid activities or other feasible community activities as may be suitably employed to achieve the objectives of such a program." The statute also requires the ad.option and effective enforcement of a minimum standards housing code, as described in Chapter 4. In addition to the Workable Program requirements contained herein, communities are advised that various HUD-assistance programs may contain additionab separate requirements tailored to meet specific program needs (e.g. relocation requirements of the urban renewal program, general planning requirements for water and sewer, or open space land grants). See Chapter 3, paragraph 7, for further information. 2. BASIC PURPOSE OF STATU'IORY PROVISION. The basic purpose of the Workable Program requirement is to ensure that communities desiring to utilize funds for renewal and housing programs understand the array of forces that create slums and blight and are willing to recognize and .take the steps within their power to prevent and overcome urban blight. The Workable Program is based on recognition that the Federal and local relationship is one of partnership in the task, and that Federal funds for renewal and housing projects cannot, by themselves, be effective unless localities exercise the full range of their powers in community efforts on a sustained and coordinated basis to the objective of preventing and eradicating slums and blight. 3. SUMMARY OF WORKABLE PROORAM REQUIREMENTS, The specific requirements of the Workable Program are based on the statutory objectives described above and are designed to provide a flexible framework Page 1 u/63 �T WORKABLE PRCGRAM FOR COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT " I l RHA 7100.1 J CHAPTER 1 for organizing community efforts to eliminate and prevent slums and blight. The Workable Program calls for progress in the following four areas: a. Code Adoption and Enforcement. The adoption of housing, building, and related codes, and development of an effective code enforceme nt program which is at least adequate to de a l with areas having high priority need for en£orcement, including both blighted areas and basically sound but deteriorating neighborhoods, and which is gear ed toward eventual community-wi de compliance with such codes. b. Planning and Programming. The establishment of a continuing public planning and programming process which develops action programs within a comprehensive planning framework for overcoming the major physical, social, and e conomic problems related to the slum and blighted areas of the community, and for establishing and preserving a well- planned community with suitable l i ving environment for family life . c. Housing and Relocation. The development of a centralized or coordinated program for assisting in the relocation of all persons and business concer_n;, displace d by public action in the community and the development of a proi~ ~ to expand the supply of housing for l ow- and mode rate-inc0u1E. famili es on the basis of equa l opportunity. d. Citizen Involvement . The establishment of programs designed to achieve meaningful involvement of citizens, including poor and minority groups , in planning and carrying out HUD-ass i sted programs related to th e Workable Program. A detailed explanati on of th e policies and r equirements for each of the above four areas is s e t forth in subseque nt chapte rs of this Handbook. 4. LOCAL ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS. In carrying out Workabl e Program responsibil i ties, many different local agencies and offices will necessarily b e involved, together with various public a nd private institutions, organization s , and individuals. For e xample , building departments, planning agencies, health offices, housing authorities, urban renewal agencies, neighborhood organizat i ons, private builder s and dev e l opers may b e involved to proyide the wide range of resources needed to meet Workable Program obj ectives. While no specific a dministrative s tructure i s r equired by the Workable Progr am, a community will be expect e d to meet t he gene ral r equirement for establi shme nt of an administrative me chanism 11/68 Page 2 �,. WORKABLE PRO'.}RAM FOR COMMUNITY I MPROVEMENT I RHA 7100.11 CHAPTER 1 responsible to the chief executive for the purpose of providing leadership, supervision, and coordination of Workable Program activities. 5, ... HUD-ASSISTED PROJRAMS FOR WHICH WORKABLE PROGRJI.M IS A REQUIREMENT a. Urban Renewal Prog_ram b. Neighborhood Developnent Program c. Concentrated Code Enforcement Program d. Interim Assistance for Blighted Areas e. Demolition Grant Program f. Community Renewal Program g. Gene ral Neighborhood Renewal Plan h. Rehabilitation loans and gr ants in urban r enewal and concentrated code enforcement areas and in other than urban r enewal or concentrate d code enforcement areas a ssisted under the provision of Sec. 115(a)(2) and Sec. 312(a)(1). i. Low-Rent Housing Program, except for Section 23, Short Term Leased Housing. j. Mortgage in sura nce under FHA Sec. 220 for housing construction and rehabilitation in urban renewal project areas. k. Mortgage insura nce under FHA 221(d)( 3) at marke t or belowmarke t inter est r at e proj ect s for low- and moderate -income famili es. 1. Re nt Supplement Proj ects under Sec . 22 l ( d)( 3 ) for low-income families, with certain exception s . 338-597 0 - 6 9 - 2 Page 3 10/68 �I I WORKABLE PROORAM FOR COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT • CHAPTER 2 CHAPTER 2. .., RHA 7100. l GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATION OF WORKABLE PROORAM APPLICATIONS 1. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF ADMINISTRATION. Workable Program applications will be evaluated in light of the varying conditions, backgrounds, problems, and traditions of the par-ticula~ community. In view of the difficulty of establisQing predetermined standards of compliance having equal applicability to all communities throughout the nation, the Department's review and determination will be guided by the statutory requirements, the adequacy of the community's proposed effort as measured against the magnitude of the job to be done, and the constraints of available Federal, State, and local resources. A second major consideration governing the evaluation of application for recertification will be evidence of reasonable continuing progress toward meeting the statutory goals and objectives and -those set forth by the community. 2. REQUIREMENTS FOR APPLJs;:.ATION CONTENT. The Workable Program is the locality's program, and it i s the r esponsibility of the locality to establish goals, action programs , and time t able s for accomplishment in each of the four elements discussed in subsequent chapters. The goals, action programs, and timetables must be approved by the Department, except where otherwise indicated in Chapter 5, pa r agraph 3. Because the emphasis is on the locality 's responsibi l ity to develop its own program tailbred to its own needs and abilities rather than on complying with speci fic Departmental requirements, the community's application must contain sufficient evidence and detail to permit an objective basis for review and evaluation . Therefore, the application must clearly and specifically describe what the community inte nds to do during the next certification period in each of the four Workable Program elements. When applying for r ecertification, the application must also clearly describe what ste ps the community t ook in the l ast period, in order to provide a basis for measurement of the community ' s continuing progress toward meeting the agree d-upon goals and objectives. In developing its "work program" in each of the four elements for the next certification period , the community must also show how the proposed act ivit ies are related to a n analysis of the problems or needs, and t o longer-range tar ge t s for accomplishment. For exampl~ in deve loping a program to meet the r equirement of Chapter 6 to expand the supply of housing for low- and moderate-income families, the applicat ion should show the relationship of it s proposed program and timet ables to an anal ysis of needs in the community and to its longer-range goals or targe ts for expansion of such supply. The questions included in Application Form 1081 are designed to e licit the information and evidence required to provide a reasonable basis for approving or disapproving the community ' s Workable Program Application. Page 1 10/68 �WORKABLE PROGRAM FOR COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT ~HA 7100.1 • I \ ) CHAPTER 2 3. 4. CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION OF WORKABLE PROGRAM APPLICATION. In reviewing a community' s application for certification or recertification of a Workable Program, the Department's assessment will be based on the followin g factors: a. Problem Analysis. Adequacy of the community's analysis of the problems and needs where required by the Workable Program elements. b. Long-Ra nge Goals . Adequacy and reasonableness of the longrange goals and targets for accompli shment proposed by the community for overcoming such problems . c. Action Programs. Adequacy of the specific a ctions and timetables proposed- to be taken by the community during the next period of certification to deal with the problems identifi ed, in light of available resource s and the magnitude of the problems . d. Progress. Demonstration of r easonable continuing progress toward meeting goals and objectives specified by the community. BASIS FOR DETERMINING ACCEPTABILITY . The acceptability of a community's initi a l appl ication for ; certification will be base d on the adequacy of the problem or nee d ana lysis in each of the e l ement s , th e extent to whi ch longer-range goals or targe t s have been identifi ed in r e lation to need, and the adequacy of the proposed action programs, in light of both need and available resources . The acceptability of an application for r ecertifi cation will b e based on t he performance of the community in meeting the goa l s, t argets, and timetable s agr ee d to at the last certification, as well as on the extent to which the proposed l ev e l of e f f ort r epresent s continui ng progr ess fr om the l a s t per i od t oward meeting its longer-range targe t s . When unexpe cte d developments or changed conditions prevent a community from meeting its agr eed- to obj e ctives and time tabl~s, the application for r e certificat ion must include a de tailed explanation of the r ea sons . .) 10/68 Page 2 �WORKABLE PROGRAM FOR COMMUNITY IMPROVEMEN'T' I RHA 7100.11 CJW>TER 3 ,, CHAPTER 3. 1. ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS AND PROCEDURES FOR WORKABLE PROGRAM CERTIFICATION FILING OF APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATION. Form HUD-1081 is to be used by the community to apply for certification or recertification of its Workable Program. Careful attention to the preparation of format and content will obviate the need for correspondence with the community and thus help to expedite the review and evaluation of the application and its approval. An original and three copies of Form HUD-1081 are to be submitted to the appropriate HUD Regional Office. An application for recertification should be submitted at least 60 days prior to expiration of the community's current Workable Program certification. A community desiring to discuss Workable Program policies and requirements or to obtain assistance and guidance in the preparation of the required Form 1081 should communicate with the HUD Regional Office. 2. GOVERNING BODY APPROVAL OF THE WORKABLE PROO-RAM. Before being submitted to the Regional Office, the application for certification and recertification on Form HUD-1081 must be approved by the executive head and the governing~- body of the community. 3. NOTIFICATION OF APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL. The HUD Regional Office will advise the applicant community of approval or disapproval of the Workable Program application for certification. a. Reasons for Disapproval or Conditional Approval. Applicati9ns may· be disapproved or conditionally approved for ~ither of two reasons listed below; an explanation of the basis for such action will be provided to the community. (1) Failure by the community to carry out the plan of action and timetable it proposed for the last certification period. In the event of disapproval or conditional approval for this reason, the community will be advised of the actions it must take to carry out the plans or steps it initially proposed but did not take and did not provide justification for not taking. ( 2) Inadequacy of plans, programs, and timetables -proposed by the community for the next certification period. In the event of disapproval or conditional approval for this reason, the community will be informed of the nature of Page 1 10/ 68 �WORKABLE PROGRAM FOR COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT I Rl!A 7100.1 • I CHAPTER 3 the inadequacy of its proposed plans and programs, and will be requested to submit additional information needed to remedy such inadequacies. b. 4. Time Limit. Applications that are conditionally approved will provide a reasonable, definite time limit for accomplishment of required actions. In the event of a conditional approval, applications for financial assistance under the applicable HUD programs will be processed, but final approvals will be withheld until the Workable Program is fully approved. ( Once a community's application is approved, no further requirements will be imposed during the period of certification.) CERTIFICATION PERIOD. All Workable Program certifications are for a two-year period. If certification of a Workable Program has expired, the execution of contracts for assistance is precluded with respect to the applicable programs listed in Chapter 1, paragraph 5. Certification is deemed not to expire, however, but rather to continue in effect for the following purposes: a. To provide Federal assistance under Title I of the Housing Act of 1949 for any urban project in the locality with respect to which a loan and grant contract is executed prior to the expiration date. -~.-: i b. To provide Federal assistance under the United States Housing Act of 1937 for any low-rent public housing being undertaken by the locality with respect to which a contract for annual contributions or capital grant is executed prior to the ex-. piration date. c. To provide mortgage and home improvement loan insurance under Section 220 of the National Housing Act with respect to property in the locality situated in: 10/68 (1) The area of any urban renewal project for which a loan and grant contract is executed prior to the expiration date, or (2) Any urban renewal area not involving Federal aid under Title I of the Housing Act of 1949 respecting which prior to the expiration date the Secretary of Housing and Urban Developnent has certified that he has approved the urban renewal plan for the area, that such plan conforms to the general plan for the locality as a whole, and that there exist the -necessary authority and financial capacity to ensure the completion of such urban renewal plan . Page 2 �WORl<".ABLE PROORAM FOR COMMUNITY JMffiOVE:MENT I • RHA 7100.11 CHAPTER 3 d. 5, To provide mortgage insurance under Section 221(d)(3) of the National Housing Act with respect to property in the locality for which a pre-application analysis has been made by the Federal Housing Administration and it has agreed in writing to accept a formal application prior to the expiration date, or located in the area of any urban renewal project for which a loan and grant contract is executed prior to the expiration date. CERTIFICATION LAPSE. Where a Workable Program certification has expired and a lapse has occurred , the community will be required to show the progress made in meeting Workable Program r equirements not only during the period in which the Workable Program was in effect, but also during the lapse d period. Thus, it is important that a community anticipate the expiration -date and initiate the actions necessary to prepare an application for recertification sufficiently in advance of this dat so that lapse may be avoided. 6. .'TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TO COMMUNITIES . 7, RELATIONSHIP OF WORKABLE PR(X;RAM AND URBAN RENEWAL REQUIREMENTS. Communities intending to apply for urban renewal assistance should be aware of the following statutory requirements: In accordance with Section lOl(d) of the Housing Act of 1949, as amended, the Department will endeavor to the maximum extent possible, to assist communities in meeting their Workable Program objectives. Field reviews of progress will be made as necess~ry midway through the period of certification and Regional Office staff will be available to the ext ent resources permit to provide consultation , advice , and t echnical assistance. a. No loan or grant contract may be e ntered into for an urban renewal project unless the Workable Program 11 is of sufficient scope and content to furnish a basis for evaluation of the need for the urban renewal project, and such project is in accord with the program. 11 b. The plan for an urban r enewal project must "conform to the general plan of the locality as a whole and to the Workable Program . . . " c. In entering into any contract for advances for surveys, plans, and other preliminary urban renewal work, the Secretary must "give consideration to the extent to which appropriate local public bodies have undertaken positive programs (through the adoption, modernization, administration, and enforcement of housing, zoning, building and other local laws, codes, and regulations . . . ) for (1) preventing the spread or recurrence Page 3 10/68 �i' WORKABLE PROGRAM FOR COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT I RHA 7100.1 J CHAPTER 3 in the community of slums and blighted areas, and (2) encouraging housing cost reductions through the use of appropriate new materials, techniques, and methods in land and residential planning, design, and construction, the increase of efficiency in residential construction, and the elimination of restrictive practices which unnecessarily increase housing costs." d. HUD will not authorize a Federal aid contract for a Neighborhood Development Program (NDP) unless there is in existence a certified Workable Pro gram which is of sufficient scope and content to furnish a basis for evaluation of the need for the proposed NDP activities and such activities are in accord with the Workable Program. Communities are advised that because of the above statutory provisions, requirements for urban r enewal assistance may differ from those nec essary for Workable Program certification purposes in the following ways: a. Evaluation of Urban Renewal Need. With respect to subparagraphs a. and d., above, a community int ending to apply for urban renewal or NDP assistance should ensure that the studies undertaken in connection with the planning and programming requirement describ ed in Chapte;r, 5 are of sufficient scope and quality to provide a basis for evaluation of the need for the urban renewal project or NDP activities. In general, the studies carried out under th e Workable Program should be adequate to determine that the area is sufficiently blighted or deteriorated to qualify for an urban renewal or NDP program. Information should be included to illustrate both building and environmental deficiencies, such as overcrowded conditions, exce·ssive densiti es, and so forth . For further information on urban renewal eligibility requirements see RHA 7205.1 of the Urban Renewal Handbook, Chapter 1, General Eligibility Requirements. A community may, if it so wishes, supplement its' Workable Program submission with other related studies having a bearing, such as a Community Renewal Pro gram, General Neighborhood Renewal Program, or other similar studies. b. Renewal Plans. With respect to b ., above, the Urban Renewal Handbook sets forth the following minimum elements of a general plan: land use plan, thoroughfare plan, community facilities plan, public improvement s program, zoning ordinance and map and subdivision regulations . The preparation of such plans ( except for a zoning ordinance or other comparable memo for guiding land usage) is not a prerequisite to the approval of the Workable Program, though many communities may find the preparaof them helpful in the development of general plans to guide 10/68 Page 4 �I.. I WORKABLE PROGRAM FOR COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT RHA 7100.11 CHAPTER 3 • community growth and development, which is a Workable Program requirement describ ed in Chapter 5. In addition, for purpose s of approving specific urban renewal proj ects, a greater de gree of planning completion may be required than would be necessary for Workable Program purposes, e spe cially in smaller communities and others seeking initial certification or recertification. c, .., Codes. With respect to c., above, a community intending to apply for urban renewal assistance is advised that approval of the housing, building , and other code r equir ements of the Workable Pro gram will constitute compliance for urban. r e newal purpose s with Se ction lOl(a) of the Housing Act of 1949, and no additional information will be r equired for that purpo s e. 8. AVAILABILITY OF WORKABLE PR03RAM AS PUBLIC DOCUMENT. Since th e Workable Pro gram is a publi c docume nt , i t must be made available for public perusal a nd examination. At the ir reque st, copies should be made available by the locality to citizen groups and organizations which should be encourage d to participate in the 'develoµn ent and implementation of the Workable Pro gram. 9. GUIDES . Supplementary guide s will be issue d to provide communities with advi ce and illustrat ions in conne ction with carryi ng out the Workable Pro gr am, including des crJption of the s cope a nd conte nt of compr ehensive pl~nni ng progr ams, ways of organizing and carrying out effe ctive r e lo cation and code enforcement pro grams, and means for encouraging and deve loping citi zen involvement. Pending i ssuance of the Guides , questions and r eque sts for technica l assistance should be dire ct ed to the Regional Offi ce. Page 5 10/68 �WORKABLE PROGRAM FOR COMMUNITY IMPROVEMEN'r RHA 7100.1 • CHAPTER 7 CHAPTER 7. CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT 1. REQUIREMENTS FOR CITIZEN I NVOLVEMENT. A guiding principle of Departmental policy is to in sure that citizens have the opportunity to participate in policies and prograijls which affect their welfare. Therefore, the Workable Program requires clear evidence that the community provides opportunities for citizens, including those who are poor and members of minority groups, to participate in all HUD assisted programs for which a Workable Program is a requirement, and in the community's plan to expand the supply of low- and moderate-income housing. (S ee Chapter 1, paragraph 5 for li st of applicable HUD programs.) The community will also be expected to show what progress has be en made durin g each certification period to achi eve an adequate and effective degree of citizen involvement. 2. PRINCIPLES AND PURPOSES OF CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT, The growing complexity of urban deve lopme nt and gove rnment organization make it essential that widespr ead opportunities for citizen involvement be created, including opportunities for poor and minority groups, for many reasons. In some cases, existing local institutions seem unable to identify the serious proplems of many citizens, as the citizens define them. In turn, th e people may feel cut off from their public r epresentative·s', and lack understanding of what government is doing to and for them. At the same time, traditional acts of pa rticipa.tion--voting , attendance at meetings, letters to Congressmen-- are frequently ineffective in dealing with the immediate problems raised by increasingly l ar ge and complex programs having direct impact on peoples' lives. For these reasons, new forms of collaborative relationships between citizens and government, new means for participation in the decision-making process, need to be developed. Recognizing th e need for experimentation and innovation, the Workable Program does not contain any specific requirements for the form that citizen participation must take. Tne choice of mechanisms depends upon the needs of the particular community and the structure of the local government. However, there are certain principles and objectives which should underlie the community's effort. One is that the community's responsibility does not end with the establishment of a particular mechanism or . set of mechanisms. The Workable Program requires continuing effort on the part of the community to improve and expand the opportunities for creative forms of participation and collaboration that both ensure repres entation by poor and minority groups. as well as enable government to take effective, purposeful, and expert action to deal with the problems and needs facing the community. It is essentia l that the participation be satisfying, rewarding, and not frustratin g if it is to achieve the basic objective of cr eating and sustaining a vo luntary union and mutual trust between governand its citizens. p 338- 597 0 - 60 - J Page 1 11/68 �WORKABLE PROORAM FOR COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT I RHA 7100.1 " CHAPTER 7 3, EXAMPLES OF CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT ACTIVITIES. It is important that the community deve lop specific plans for achieving and maintaining adequate and e ffective citizen involveme nt in the programs covere d. A community may establish a new community-wide advisory committee embracing all major interests~ including the poor and members of minority groups or may create several new special-purpose groups, or may make b ette r utilization of existing organi zations. Communities which already have establishe d ef.fective citizen advisory committees for Workable Program purposes are encouraged to retain them and improve their effectiveness. Communities participating in the Mode l Cities program or other programs involving a high degree of citizen participation are encouraged to coordinate the citizen involvement activities under the Workable Program with the citi zen pa rtic ipat ion r equirements of th ese programs , where applicable. In addition to establishing appropriate organizational means for citizen involvement, a community may wish to take such steps as the following in orde-r - t o- further the objectives of this element: a. .. .. , , , b. The developfilent of specific function s for c itizen committees, such as having t hem hold public hearings , prepare comments on Workable Program appli cation s , evalua t e proj ect pla n s , conduct interviews and surveys of neighborhood residents ' views, etc. The development of specific methods by which the community can establi sh a basis for insuring there will be fa ir and reasonable r epr esentativeness of advisory committee s participa ting in th e Workable Program. For example , one method by which to compo se a community-wide advisory committee might be to choose repres entatives in equal proportions, from private neighborhood groups, government program-connected advisory groups, and civic groups. / 4. c. The establi shment of a planning group t o he l p develop new ideas and t e chniques for generating greater involvement among poor and di sadva ntaged groups . d. The pr ovision of funds and technical assistance to neighborhood and other advisory groups so they may become be tter informed and equippe d t o deal with complex redevelopment problems. e. The assignment of specific activities in HUD- assiste d pro j ects to de signate d ne ighborhood groups, such as evaluating site and design cons ide r ations, e stablishing information centers, and making recommendations with r espect to housing project regulation s. CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION OF APPLICATIONS. To provide a basis for .e valua ting the citize n involveme nt el ement of Workable Program ll/ 68 Page 2 �WORKABLE PROORAM FOR COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT I RHA 7100.~ CHAPTER 7 • applications and for determining the adequacy of such involvement, the community will be expected to submit the following kinds of information: a. A description of the arrangements or working relationships established to provide citizen groups with opportunities for access to the decision-making pro.cess with respect to the related HUD-assisted projects related to the Workable Program. b. A description of the nature and range of issues with which the participating groups and individuals have dealt, the recommendations subsequently made, and the general results and accomplishments derived from such involvement. c. A description of the specific steps the community took in the preceding period and proposes to take in the next certification period to achieve or maintain an adequate and effective degree of citizen involvement, including plans for providing sufficient information, technical assistance, and access to decision-making. \.>, Page 3 10/68 �HUD-1081 (11-68) CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT REQUIREMENT. The Workable Program requires clear evidence that the community provides and continues to expand, opportunities for citizens, especiall y tho se who are poor and members of minority groups, to participate in all phases of the related HUD-assisted renewal and housing programs. The particular organizational means for community involvement is left to the discretion of each community, but the community mu s t demon s trate in its Workable Progra m submission that it provides clear and direct access to decision making, relevant and timely information, and necessary technical assistance to participating groups and individuals in programs covered. 1. (a) Identify the groups participating in the HUD-assisted programs related to the Workable Program and in the community's program to expand the supply of low- and moderate-income hou sing. (b) Describ e the type of groups (e.g. civic, neighborhood, hous ing) that are participating, and the constituency repre sented (e.g. poor, middle-class, Negro, public hous ing res idents ) • • 18 • �HUD·! 081 (11-68) (c) Describe what pa rticular HUD-ass is ted programs and proj ects s uch groups a re parti ci pating in . • (_., ., (d) Desc ribe efforts to achi eve coordination among cit.izen participation structures loc ated in the same area or having s imilar program inte res ts. · - 19 - �HUD-1081 (11-68) 2. Describe the arrange ments or working re lations hips s et up to provide groups a nd indi vidua ls opportunities for access to a nd partici pa tion in deci s ion-making in the a ppli cabl e HUD-ass isted progra ms • • 3. Des cribe the s te ps whi ch have been taken in regard to the applicable programs to provide participating groups a nd individua ls s uffi c ie nt information a nd techni ca l ass is tance . 4. Des cribe the nature a nd range of issues re lating to the applicable programs with whi ch participa ting groups and individua ls have dealt; the recommenda tions s ubs eque ntly made; and the s pec ific res ul ts and accomplis hments of the partic ipa tion. • 20 U. S. GOVERNMENT P RINTING OFFICE: 1068 0 - 327 - 649 �CITY OF A.TLANTA. May 30, 1969 CITY HALL ATLANTA, GA. 30303 Tel. 522-4463 Area Code 404 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING COLLIER B . GLADIN , Dir e ctor MEMORANDUM TO: Jof1) Robi ~son FROM: c~ SUBJECT: Summer Program 1 69 Our contacts with the Summer Program for all matters except zoning will be George Aldridge and for zoning, Tom Shuttleworth . CG/jp �r . FUl'f0I NG OF URBAN R.EN:SW1~L AND lIBJ.GHBOREOOD DEVELO?i:,fENT PROGB}J,1 PROJ ECTS APRI L 29, 1969 . . �-I ,- . '---· · The City of Atlanta is pres ent ly engaged in eight Urban Renewal Projects and five Neighborhood Developme nt Program Projects (3 in execution, 2 in Thes e projects are fund ed jointly by the City and the planning only). Federal Governmen t. The funding arrangement calls for a contribution equal to one~third of the Net Project costs from tha City with the· re~ rnaini.ng two--thirds being suppJied by ·che Federal Gov ernmen t. The City's share may b e in the form of ca sh contributions or non-ca sh grants-in-aid, th e se grnrits-in- aid are demo lition and removal work, project or site i ~prov eme nt s , public and supporting facilities, and other s such as credits fro~ construc~ion of public housings. At pres ent, the eight Urb an Ren rn-1 al project~ presently in execution are Slunrna rized as follows: Net Project Costs Local Non- Cash Gra nts-In-Aid Local Cash and Real Estate Cr edits $60 millionl 20 rn:i.llion 1 million This points very emphatically to th e feet that our prese nt Urban Renewa l program has been financed al mos t comp l e tely through the use of non-cash grants·· in-aid. The res ults of this policy can be seen in th_e long delays encountered in the clo sing out of these projects, some of which date back into the 1950 's·. The cash used for these projects has cor:ie frcr:rt money set aside in the 1957 and 1963 Genera l Obl igat ion Bond Issue s and totaling $3.2 milliono There- fore, we have, at present, $2.1 million of unencu:.1bered fun ds available f:rom this source. Of this amount, $1. 7 is presently expected to be needed lof this amount $4.5 mi llion or 7\% has been incurred as interest charges. �- I ___·L__- to meet the cash requin:ments of the Be~:fo:cd-Pine Neit;hborhooc1 Develop;T1.2ni: Program Project in 1970. The non.,c ash contributions of $20 million are the eligible portion of total expenditures totaling about $29 million and have some of the following forms . School Sect i on 107 2 & Specia l Credits Streets Parks Water T.mp:r.ove1aent Sewer Improvement s Special Facilities Traffic I r,1p;:-ovemeats . Oth er $llol~ million 1.3 million l~. 7 m:i.llion .7 million . 6 million c6 m:i.lJ.:Lon .3 m:i.11:Lon .1 million million -~ $20.0 million Some of the problems encount ered because of t he use of non-cash contributions (9408% of total city funding) as the City's source of funding Urban Renewal activities are : 1. Butler Street A. Middle School with a total estim.'.lted co st of $2 million has been delaying the close of this proj ect , but should be under contract by August of 1969. 2o Ra-1vson - Washington A• . Neighborhood Fac ilities, Building with a total estimated cost of $1 million of which $150,0C0 will be an e ligibl e proj ect cost. This project is at present unfunded with -the only poss ible source of funds be i ng t~rough Mode l Citi es o It is presen t ly plenned f or the Ci t y to purchase the l and from t he Housing Authority and hold this until a det ermi na tion i s made _; 2r.rN1i rs rP.sulti.n ~ fro m th e construction of Publ ic Housing . �-I -· . L_ __ r egard irrg t h e t.1. se of :t-:ode J. CH :i. es f und s. B. P.s.rk 1-lith an es tiir.a t ed co s t 0£ $2L:0,000 of wh :i.ch $33,000 will b0 el igibl e cos ts . No s our c e of fu nding is pr e sently asce r tainabl e , A. El emen t a ry School 1-1ith an e st i ma t ed cost of $1.5 mj_llion a nd expected to be und er contract by Aui us t of 1969. B. An e:-::pansion of the cx:i.st ing el ernent 8. ry scho o1. with an e s ti- mated co s t of $700,000 and a t pre sent unf:un ded. c. Pa1·l~ with an e s tima t ed co s t of $75,000 which is al s o p:;:-es ently unftinded . 4, Th omasvi ll e A. El ement ary schoo l wi th $1.5 mill i on es timat ed co st and expect ed to b e under contract by Au gus t, 19 69. B. Pa rk with est i ma t ed cost of $126,00 0 which i s at pr esent unfunded. C. Tvn primar y scho ol EJ with $1 million es tina t ed total cost and a middl e school wi th an est i ma t ed co s t of $2 mi llion are unfunded and n o s our c e is s een until nt l eas t J ~~e of 1971. The a dvent of th e Neighb orho od Deve l opment Program has br ought t o a n end t he period during whi ch t he Ci ty could pl edge an i mprovemen t and t he n wai t unt il funding b ecame av.s.i l ab le b efore c ompl et i ng it. Und e r t he t erms of an NDP agreeme nt, the City must h ave co~nple t ed or have unde r cont ract al l non- ca sh grants - in- aid p l edged f or tha t pa r ticul ar yea r or contribut e the requ i r ed amoun t in c ash. - 3- �.. ,.... ' Our p:rc: :, cnt 1-mr p1~ojects We:re funded fo;~ 19 69 £r ora c11;:-eac1y existing imp:rnve·· ments o~ supporting facilities amounting to a tot a l City coDmi ttment of $10. 8 million. This supports a tot a l ·Nei ~hbo:choo<l Development Program of $32.l, million. The 1970 progr~~ is expected to hav e the follo wing Ci~y requirements: Non··Cash Ca sh $1. 7 milli on $ • 2 f\l:i.llion Bedfor<l-Pine 1.3 million 1.5 mi lli on Hocl e l CHie3 Edgei-lOOcl Vine City .1 milU.on .1 mill ion • 2 million . 2 million $3.l} million $1.9 mi J.lio~1 - ·-- --'"-- This would su pport a to tal pro gram o f $19.9 mi ll i on aud wou ld increase gr eat ly :i.f the Edge'i·wocl and Vine Cit y projects were expanded to a signi .. fic abt l eve l of activi ty. This means that to support th e fairly light l eveJ. of r:c tivi.ty projected fo,~ 1970 , th e City i·i:i.1.l need approxima teJ.y $1. 7 million . I£ any new m:eas are added or the l eve l of activity incr eased t his would increase from $2.5 to $4.0 million for 1970 . The possible sourc es of funds include: l. Gen::;ra l Funds ~ This s:i urce is already under consid er-ab l e pressu::ce and no relief is p resent ly anticipated. 2. The G. annually. o. Bonds already ap prov ed, fo r i ssue in the amo un t of $4 mi llion '. The financing of Neighborhood Development Programs f m m these bonds wou ld r equire the us e of almos t this entire amou~t every year and could very likely become erriliroifed in l egal tangle s . 3. Ano ther possibility is a sp ec ial Neighborhoo d Deve lopment Program General Obligation Bond Issue of $10 - $20 mil lion in 1970 with a nother issue 4 or 5 years lat er or the ob ta i ning of voter approva l to issue G. O. Bonds for th i s purpose i n the amount of $3-5 m:i.lJ.ion per year. [ • �. L. - This appr o 2ch is natu~elly sub ject t o .. T'df . ~.E!S of th e _p~b lic, and, there~ fo re , of u~cer tain dep enclabil i ty. L~. I I Ii. !' ' ' . Pe;:-haps the best method would be tln:ou::;h th e obtri:.i.ning of: a n ew rev-e nue sour c e , by state approval , such as a sales t ax or a payro ll tax of which a Cf,rtain portion ,-,oulc~ be eari;;art e d for Ne.:i.ghbo:chocrJ Dev_e lopment Programs . I • Of course in the pEr.suit of a ne-::-1 s ource of revenue we ,:n-e at loige:cheads !I ;, i' . with t he stet e and ma y not be able to obta in a satisfac t ory revenue s ource . I1 · Regardless of th e raetho <l you favor in obta i n ing the nee2c<l funds, it is .. i mperat i ve , if th e City of Atlanta is to 11'.aj_nte.in its progressive i mage and l 1· •' "•, r i to continue • ,_ C J_ LV thcrt a som~ce be found ; because the c ont i nuat ion of a signific ant program of r es tora tion and reheblitation of th e c entra l core of Atlanta is a vital cl ement in tl1 e continued evolution H Ii r: of our City. r: il ,I 1 ,.- I j ·1 I I -5- �AGENDA Meeting: Department of Housing & Urban Development Atlanta Planning Department Atlanta Housing Authority Atlanta Housing Code Division of the Department of Buildings Held: Committee Room frl 10:00-10:30 a.m., March 12, 1968 I. II. III. Jim Smith - Introduction of Mce~ing, Introduction of Speakers Collier Glc>.din - Import.wee of ~rvey , to City of Atlanta, Planning Dep.::rtm.ent, Housing Code Division. Responsibility of Planning Department and Housing Code Division, Introduction of Planning Department Contact Person (Neyers). HUD representatives - Importance of Survey to Housing Code Compliance Progre.m, to Workable Progran, to other Cities. .' .. ~ In attendance: J. S. Buchanan Tom Ficht Harold Taylor IV. Questions and Answers �AGENDA Meetine: Department of Housing & Urban Development Planning Department Atlanta Housing Authority Housing Code Division of the Dept. of Buildings Held: Office of Collier Glndin 10:30-11:00 a.m., March 12, 1968 Chairman: Helen l.feyers ~cussion Topics: 1. Evaluation of Atlanta survey techniques and procedures by Department of Housing & Urban Development and Atlanta Housing Authority. 2. Use of Atlanta's survey information by Department of Housing & Urban Development and by the City for Federal program planning. 3. Development and adoption of a uniform set of standards and .definitions for structural evaluation and rating. 4. Organizing a corr.mittee or other mechanism from the . Department of Housing & Urban Developm~ nt, Atlanta Housing Authority, Atlanta Planning Department, Housing Code Division to work on the above. �, / ATTENDANCE SHEET ! j Collier Gladin - Planning Dept. W. Buchanan - Dept. of Housing & Urban Development Tom Ficht - Dept. of Housing & Urban Development Harpld Taylor - Dept. of Housing &_Urban Development Wally Screws - Atlanta Housing Authority Jim Smith - Housing Code Division of the Dept. of Buildings George Aldridge - Planning Department John Watson - Planning Department Helen Meyers - Planning Department Jack Linville - Planning Department Wallace Edson - Housing Code Division Robert Tipton - HousiP~ Code Division 10 Housing Code Inspectors - Housing Code Division •.. �l\1EIG1-IBOR..1-IOOD D:'!:V:-.:LOP11ENT PROGR.!J :;: PI'OJ ECTS APRI L 29 , 1969 �The City of At l anta i s pres ent l y engage d in ei ght Ur ban Renewa l Pr ojec ts and five Neighbo r ho od Development Pro gram Projects (3 i n ex ecut ion , 2 in planrti ng onl y). Thes e pr oj ec ts a r e f unded jo int l y by t he Ci ty and t h e Fede:r:a l Governmen t. The fu nding a r r angement ca ll s for a contribution equal to one- th ird of the Ne t Proj ect co s t s from t h e City wi t h t h e remaining ti,10~t h i rds being s upplied by the Federa l Government . The Ci t y ' s share ma y be i n the f or m of cash cont r i butions or non- ca sh grants-in-aid , t hes e grant s -in- a i d ar e demol it io n and r emova l wor k , pr ojec t or s it e i mprovements , public and support ing f acil ities , and ot h e r s s uch a s c red i t s f rom cons truct ion of pub lic ho us i ngs . At pr ese nt, t he eight Ur ban Renewa l pro j ec t s presen tl y in execution are s unm1ar i zed a s follows: Net Pro j ec t Cos t s Loc a l Non-C a sh Gran ts - In-Aid Loca l Ca sh a nd Rea l Es t a te Cr edit s $60 millionl 20 million 1 million This poi nts ve ry emphat ic a lly to the f ac t t hat our pr es ent Urban Renewa l pr ogram has b een f inanced al most compl etel y through t h e us e of non- cash grant s-in- aid . The r e su lts of t h is pol i c y c an b e seen in tl~e long d elays enc ountered in th e c los ing out of these pr ojects, some of wh ich da t e back i nto the 1950 ' s ·. Th e cash used f or thes e pr oj ects has c ome from money set aside i n the 1957 a nd 1963 General Ob l igat ion Bond Issue s and to t aling $3.2 mil l i on o Th er efo r e, we have, at present , $2.1 million of unenc umbered f und s ava ilab l e f r om thi s s ource . Of th is amount, $1.7 is pre s ent l y expected to be needed lo£ thi s a,t1ount $4. 5 million or 7}{/4 has been incurred as interest charges o �·. ' - to mee t . tl ,e cash r equi rements of t he Bedfor d-Pine Nei ghbo r hood Development Program Proj ec t i n 1970 . The non- cash con t ributions of $20 mi l lion a re the e l igibl e portion of to tal expenditures tota ling ab out $2 9 million and have some of the fol lowing fo rms . Schoo l Sec tion 1072 & Special Credi ts Stre et s Parks Wa t er I mpr ovement Sewer I mpr ovemen:: s Spec i al Fac i l it i es Tra ff:i. c I m:_Jl'."ovements . Other $11o4 million 1. 3 mi ll ion ~.• 7 mi ll i on • 7 mi ll i on .6 million 06 mill i on .3 mi ll i on .1 million o3 mi llion $20 . 0 million Some o f th e prob l ems encountered becaus e of th e us e of non-ca sh cont ributions ( 9li. o8% of total city f unding) as t he City ' s s our ce of funding Ur ba n Renewal activiti e s ar e: 1. But l er St ree t A. Middle School with a to tal e s timated co st of $2 milli on has been delaying th e c l ose of this pro j ect, but should be under contrac t by August of 1969. 2o Rawson - Washington A. Ne ighbor hood Fa c ilitie s, Build ing with a total es t i ma ted co st of $1 million of wh ich $150, 000 will be a n eligible pr oj ect c ost. This pr oj ect i s at pr esent unfunded with the only pos sib l e s ource of f unds being through Model Ci ties o It is presently planned for the City t o purchase the l and f r om th e Housing Au thor ity a nd hold this unt il a dete rmi nation is made �·• J - r egarding the use of Mode l Ci t ies funds. B. Park with an estimated co st of $240,000 of which $33,000 will be eligible costs . No source of funding is presently ascertainable . 3. Rockdale A. Elementar y School with an estimated cost of $1.5 million and expec ~ed to be under contra ct by August of 1969. B. An expansion o f the existing ele1 entary school with BL esti- mated c ost of $700 ,000 and at present unfunded . C. Par k 1·1 ith an estimc1ted cost of $75,000 which is also pre sent l y unfunded. ~.. Thomasvil le A. Elementary school with $LS million estimated cost and exp ected to b e under contract by August , 1969 . B. Park with estimated cos t of $126,000 which is at p res ent unfunded. C. Tw:> prima ry schoola with $1 million estimated total cost and a middle school with an estimated cost of $2 mi llion are unfunded and no source is seen until &t least J une of 1971. The advent of the Neighborhood Development Program has brought to an end the period during which the City could pledge an improvement and then wait until funding became ava ilable before completing it. Under the terms of an NDP agreemen t , the Ci t y mus t have comple ted or have und er contrac t all non-cash grants-in-aid pl edged f or t h at part i c ular year or contribute t he required amount i n cash . - 3- �-I_ I ' Our present NDP pr oj ec ts we:;_·e funded for 1969 fr om already ex isting i mprove~ ments or suppor ting facilities amoun ting to a tota l City coP-anittment of $10 .8 million. This supports a t ota l l·~eighborhood Development Program of $32.fi. million. The 1970 program is expected to have the following City requirements : Non~Cash Cash Bedfo1·d-Pine $ • 2 million $1. 7 mil lion 1.5 millinn 1.3 million Hodel Cities • l mi ll1.c11 . 2 mi llion Edgewood • 2 million . 1 mil ?. ion Vine City $3.Lf mi ll lou $1.9 mill ion Thi s would support a total program of $1909 mi l lion and would i ncrease great ly if the Edgewood and Vine Cit y proj ect s were expanded to a significant level of activi t y. This means that to support th e fair ly light level of activity projected f.o r 1970, the City wj_ll need approxi mately $1. 7 million . I f any new areas are added or the level of activity increased this woul d increase f rom $2 •.S to $4. 0 mi llion for 19 700 The possible s ources of fund s include: 1. General Funds - This ro urce is already under considerab l e pressure and no relief is presently anticipat ed . 2. The G. annually . o. Bonds already approved, f or issue in the amount of $4 mi llion ' The fi nanc ing of Neighborhood Development Pro6rams from these bonds would require t he us e of almost this entire amoutit every year and could ver y likely be come embroited in l egal tangles. 3. Another possibility is a spec ial Neighborhood Development Program General Obligation Bond Issue of $10 - $20 million in 1970 with another issue 4 or 5 years lat er or the obtaining of voter approval to issue G. O. Bonds for this purpose in the amount of $3-5 million per year. �' .I This approach is n atura l ly s ubject to t:..he ut :Lrns of th e public, and, t herefo re , of unce rtain dependab ility . 4. PerLaps the be st metlod would be th r ough the obtaining of a n eH revenue s ource, by s tate approva l, such as a s ales tax or a payr oll tax of which a c ertain portion wou ld be earma:i::-ked for Neighborhoo:1 Deve lopmen t Progr e....rns . Of cours e in the pursuit of a new sourc e of r ev enue we are a t lo ggerh eads with the sta ~ and may not be able to obta in a s at isfacto ry revenue source . Regard le s s of the method you f avor in ob t aini ng the needed funds , it is i mperat i ve, if the City of At lanta is to ma inta in its progre ssive i mage and t o c ont i nu e its drama t ic deve l opment , that a source be found ; bec au s e the cont i nuat ion of a signific ant program of restoration and rehabl i ta tion of t he c entral co r e of Atlanta i s a v ital element in t he continu ed evo l utio n o f our Cityo - 5- �COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION IN PLANNING OF MODEL NEIGHBORHOOD PROGRAM City Planning Department City Hall Atlanta, Ga. January, 1968 OUTLIN"E .INTRODUCTION IMPORTANCE OF ORGANIZATION PROCEDURES FOR PLANNING PROBLEM ANALYSIS, GOAIB & PROGRA..M STRATEGY STATEMENT - GUIDE TO COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION IN PLANNI NG (1) Discussion Reports (2) Distributien of Rep0rts ATTACHMENTS Discussion Reports Chart Report #1 - Problem .Analysis, Sample Outline �IMPORTANCE OF ORGANIZATION If the planning of the Model Neighborhood Program is to be successful, it is absolutely essential that all key participants ·i.ir the program are well organized. This means that the following organi zational matters should be accomplished before planning begins. 1. The Model Neighborhood Executive Boa rd should be formed to act as the ultimate authori ty of the pr@gram. It should allow representation from all levels of gover-JLment - city, county, state, and federal; residents of the Model Nei ghborhood area; and residents of the city-at-large. 2. The Model Neighborhood staff should be f ormed, including the executive director, the three chief planners and the technical staff. 3. Stable local organizations which adequ at el y represent the residents of the various neighborhoods in the area should be in operation. While those organizations should be representative of the interests of all residents and give everyone a voice in their affairs, they should not be se cumbersome that they cannot work effectively with the planners. In other words, it will be physica.JJ..v impossible for the planners to carry all of their work directly to the 'grass roots' organizations of the area. This may be necessary for some key issues, but for the most part planners will have to work with a small committee of 10-20 persons if they are to accomplish anything worthwhile. �COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION IN PLANNING OF MODEL NEIGHBORHOOD PROGRAM INTRODUCTION The Model Neighborhood Program offers an excellent opportunity to bring about basic improvements in one of the most problematic areas of Atlanta. The area selected for the pr0gram contains all the varied and complicated forms of urban blight which plague American cities today, from overcrowded, su~standard housing to incompatible land use mj_xtures to poer street conditions and inadequate community facilities to all facets of socio-economic poverty and deprivation. Most of these conditions have deep roots and are so complex and of such a nature that it will take nothing less than a special concentrated long-term effort to eliminate them. So far no major city in the country has been successful in eliminating them. The Model Neighborhood Program can bring about t he special concentrated effort which is needed to alleviate the conditions of the ' Model Neighborhood' area. It is designed to pool the resources of the city, county, state, and federal governments along with tho se of private interest groups to make a total attack on the serious and widespread problems of the area for a period of several years. The funds it provides will support the pr gram through the planning and implementation stages. However, if the Model Neighborhood Program is to avoid the mistakes of many previous efforts to help slwn residents it is very important that the pr gram be carefully planned and that local residents be involved throughout all stages of planning. The purpose of this report is to show how c mmunity par ticipation ean be effectively fitted into the planning f the M del Nei~hborho0d Pr gram. -2- �Hence the neighborhood groups of the area should be capable of fer.ming such a cemmittee which can wor k with the planners and relay this work to the 'grass ro0ts' groups . It has been suggested that the steering committee of the various neighb0rhood gr oups in the area serve this function . PROCEDURES FOR PLANNING The federal government has set the pr ocedure s for the planning of the Model NeighborhQod Program. The period allowed f or planning is one year, beginning with the date of the congressional announcement of the program (Nov. 15, 1967 - Nov• . 15, 1968). During t his period t he foll0wing planning items have to be submitted to the fe de ral government for approval: 1. Problem Analysis, Goals & Progra~ Strategy Statement 2. Five -Year Pl an 3. Firs t-Year Action Progr am 4. Pl anning and Evaluation Progr am S. Statement of Administ rative St ructLITe for Impl ement ation Of t hese planning submission requirements , the firs t one - the Problem Analysis, Goals and Program St rategy'Statemeht - i s probably the most important, as it will set the stage for the rest of the planning effort. It will establish the general orientation of the Five-Year Plan and the FirstYear Action Program and will initiate the general procedures for community participation in planning. Thus, it can serve as a guide as to how the local residents will be involved in plam1ing. -3- �PROBLEM ANALYSIS, GOALS AND PROGRAM STRATEGY STAT~j§JIT-GUIDE TO COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION IN PLANNING The preparation of the Problem Analysis, Goals and Program Strategy is divided into three stages or milestones: Strategy. Problem Analysis; Goals; and It is intended that the Model Neighborhood planning staff and the community will be working cl0sely toget her in this preparation so that the best of their ideas will go into the f inal statement submitted to HUD. (1) DISCUSSION REPORTS The basis 0f the working relationship between the Model Neighborhood planning st aff and community will cent er ar oLU1d discussion repor ts to cover each milestone: Problems; Goals; and Strategy. These reports will be done by the planning staff and designed to st imulate discussion among t he r esi dents . They will not be the f inal word on anything, but merely present t he information available to the pl anning st aff so as to initi ate community involvement and discussion on t he significant pl anni ng is sues. The community will be able to criticize , add to and/or subtract from the reports . F0r exampl e , t he f irst r epor t will cover the subject: Problem Analysis and attempt to identify and survey the major condi t ions and problems of the Model Neighborhood area which ju st ify treatment. a. It will: define and document the major conditi0ns And problems as far as available data will allow and according to f ollowing categories: employment; housing ; schools; recreation ; land use; health services; family, legal services; police protection.; ,and 'ether. -4- �b. preseBt the i..nforrnati0n in a simple and concise manner so th2t lay citizens will have a minimum amount of tr<:mble in reading it. c. provide a brief questionnaire on which residents can rate the priority of problems in their community according to the above categories in (a). d. provide space in which residents caD criticize the contents of the report, i.e., redefine problems, r eorganize data, contribute additional ideas, etc. (2) DISTRIBUTION OF REPORTS The reports are to be distributed to each of the six communicities in the Model Neighborhood area. They will include infonnation on the area as a whole and on the particular community to which it is distributed. It probably will not be feasible to get written responses from all residents ef the area. But perhaps certain people frem each community could be responsible for surveying the responses of the residents, summarizing them, and writing them down to be ret urned to the planning staff. The reports will be all wed to circulate for a maximum period of two weeks. This should give enough time for r esidents to gather up their written responses te the report. Also during this time it would be desirable to have a general meeting in each community, whe r e residents can _freely express their own ideas ab0ut the subj ect matter of the report. After this circulation period which hopefully will br ing about fruitful dialogue and exchanges between the planners and the cormnunity, the planning staff should then be in a position to draw up final reports on Pr blems, Goals and St rategy which fully incorporate the ideas of �the residents. These reports would then make up the final Problem Analysis, Goals, and Pregram Strategy Sta tement . ATTACHMENTS Attached to this report are: 1. a chart which shows how the deadline dates and circulation periods of the discussion reports fit int0 the work program for the Problem Analysis, Geals, and Progr am Strategy Statement . 2. a sample outline of Rep0rt #1, Probl em Analysis. - 6 - �DISCUSSION REPORTS CHART PLANNING ACTIVITY Milestone Work Tasks Jan . Feb. Mar . Apr. May l 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 - 1) Problem Analysis Goals and Strategy Swnmary ef Tasks l) Citizen or i entation 2) Problem Analysis 3) Goals Development 4) Strate gy 5) Pr eparation of Report A) Preblem Analysis Report #1 1) Assemble Availabl e Data 2) Decision on Additional Data Requi red 3) Gather Additional Data Required 4) Citizen Analysis of Problems 5) Summarize and .Anal yze 6) Pr epare Report Legend Deadline for distributing reports to community .A Circulation period - - - - Deadline for collection reports from community -y - ·- .--I- - - �Jan. Miltest0ne Werk Tasks Feb . Mar. Apr. Summary of Tasks ' B) Goals Report #2 1) Decument Exi sting Goal s 2) Citizen Goals Set ting 3) Synthesis and Repor t Pr eparation C) Str ategy Report #3 1) Devel 0p Program Approach 2) Establish Program Pr i ority 3) I denti fy Cr itical Changes Requir ed 4) Report Preparation I May 1234 1234 1234 1234 1234 •--, - L.. ---. -- �REPORT #1 - PROBLEM ANALYSIS SAMPLE OUTLINE I. II. Introduction A. Pu~pose of report - to identify and document major conditiens · and problems of area B. Brief description of Model Neighborhood Area and its six communities Problems of Model Neighborhood Area as a Whole 1. 2. 3. 4. s. I II. 6. Health services 1. Family, legal services Housing Employment Schools Recreation Land Use 8. 9. Police protection and c0mmunity relations Other Problems Which Are Especially Acute In Parti cular C0mmunity (e.g. Grant Park) While Grant Park contains all of the proble s affecting the Model Neighborhood areas as a whole, it is especiall~r har dpressed with the following pr oblems. 1. 2. IV. Employment Family, legal services Questionnaire: How Do You Rate Your Community? Schools ___god ___fair ___poor v. Housing Etc. ---good --- fair ---poor Comments 1. Do you think this report adequat ely covered the main problems f your neighborhood? 2. What problems do you find not mentioned in the report? � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document .------ - - - - - - - - - - - -- -- - -- - --- .July 18, 1969 (',.__ A meeting of the Planning and Development Committee was held in Committee Room 2, Second Floor, City Hall, at 2 :00 P. M., Friday, July 18, 1969. @ ...... Committee members present: ~ Rodney Cook, Chairman Q. V. Williamson Jack Summers John Flanigen ~ ~ ......~~ w (/) < w Committee members absent: c· Gregory Griggs Char.li e Leftwich George Cotsakis Hugh Pierce ....!.. c~: 2: J cc 0 0 co Edwin Sterne, ) Frank Etheridge ) Housing Authority The Chairman called the meeting to order and the following business was considered: 1 I • A r-'\ • PUBLIC HEARI NG - ANN EXA. TIOI'-! PETITION BY JULIUS SCHNEIDER MEDICAL FOUNDATION, INC., COLUMBUS UNION CONFERENCE ASSOCIATION OF SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST AND EUGENE A. ANDERSON. Charl es Watkins, First National Bank Building, was present representing the three property owners involved. Two other persons were prese nt in support of the annexation. There wa s no opp:isition. @ .,.. "" ~ ·O "-111 ...... w ,£,,, (/) ( '-..._., tat'( LiJ The staff presented a deta il ed report to each comm ittee member present re lati ve to this petition , certifying that it meets a ll requirements set forth by the State Enabling Legi slation and applicab le c ity ordinances , and recommended its approve!. The property in question lies in Land Lot 29 of the 14th District of Fulton, former ly Fayette County, and involves 69. l acres; of the total acrea ge, 46.6 acres is zoned A- 1 apartments; 17 acres is zoned R-3 and a sma ll er C-1 tract li es in Fulton County. Mr. G ladin e·xplained the c ity wou ld be annexing this property under the zoning most c lose ly related to the ex isting county z oning, which in this instance is practi ca ll y ide ntical to the county' s. All city services to the area are available, or can be provided upon req uest (letters to this effe ct from the appropriate city departments are included in the report) . In answer to que stioning by Mr. Summer~, Mr. Watkins stated the owners wish to come into the c ity for the services that are ava il ab le and to make their land more marketable for housing and sa le of apmtments. !l. c::i-< , . ., "'-::: 1:!. ... J Q:'. 0 0 u - -' �Minutes · Planning and Development Committee July 18, 1969 - Page Two '·...__ ... I The committee expressed its concern about a tract immediately to the north lying in unincorporated . Fulton County which, upon approval of this annexation petition, would become landlocked and asked if it could be included along with this petition. Mr. Gladin explained this is one type of problem you incur in the petition route and it could not be legally included, but could be brought up at the next filing period in May, 1970. The committee felt this would be highly desirable and should be encouraged at that time. Mr. Eugene Anderson, part-owner of the tract which would become appeared speaking for himself and Mrs. Schneider, also part-owner, be willing to have their property annexed; that, however, he could for Mr. Steinmetz, another owner, but Mr. Steinmetz had told him to be annexed. landlocked, stating they would not officially speak he would be willing In answer to questioning by Mr. Cook, Mr. Anderson stated the C-1 zoning approved by the · county was done so as part of an overall Medical Complex proposal which subsequently fel I_ through much to their regret and loss, and there is no commercial development in the area presently. There being no further discussion, the_ matter was referred to Executive Session. In Executive Session, upon unanimous vote, this petition was approved by the committee. 1 . B. PUBLIC HEARING - ANNEXATION PETITION BY JOHN E. LIVADITIS GARMON ROAD. There was no opposition present. A detailed report relative to this petition certifying its compliance with State Enabling Le gislation and app licabl e city ordinances was presented to ea ch committee member pre sent and the staff recommended approva l . The property li es in Land Lot 177 of the 17th District and is approximately 2 acres in si z e. Mr. G ladi n stated the property is presently zoned R- 1 (Reside ntial) a nd would be annexed as R-1; that all services are available, or can be provided upon request (lettersto this e ffect are a part of the report). (- ,, Mr. Li vaditis was present a long with his representative, Robert Smith . Mr . Smith acknowledged the y were aware of the fact there a re no existing sewers to the property and . the present plans are to use two septic tanks, but the y are hopeful of working out an easement agreement with the adjoi ning property owner to connect with an outfall �Minutes Planning and Development Committee July 18, 1969 - Page Three sewer 150 feet from Mr. Livaditis 1 property line. Mr. Cook called to Mr. Smith's attention a letter in the report from the Public Works Department stating that sanitary sewer is not available for the property to be annexed on Garmon Road and would not be available until approved by the property owners along this section. Mr. Smith stated they realized securing the easement would be difficult but were still hopeful it could be worked out, and in the meantime, the septic tanks are an alternative. Mr. Smith stated Mr. Livaditis is ready to begin bricking the house and doesn't have any water; since there is a charge to tap onto the water fo r property outside the city, he wanted to know if final approval of this petition by the Board of Aldermen would be expedited to relieve him from having to pay this charge. A check with the Water De partment indicated that if this committee approves the annexation peti t ion today, they would not charge Mr. Livaditis to tap onto the water prior to final approval of the petition. Messrs. Smith and Livaditis expressed their appreciation to the committee. The matter was then refe rred to Executive Session, and upon unanimous vote, this petition was approved by the committee. 2. STATUS OF RECERTIFICATION OF WORKABLE PROGRAM Pie rce Mahon y explaine d tha t the Planning staff is progressing rapidly toward completion of work fo r recerti fi ca t ion of the Wo rka ble Prog ram for a two- ye a r period, ra t he r than one ye a r which has been approve d in the past . He stated the re have bee n considerable revisi ons in the req uire me nts of the p rog ram fo r recert ification, mak ing it much more diffic ul t to pu t toge ther a nd committi ng us to a much more sol id app roach . He comme nted brie fl y on some o f the new aspe c ts of the progra m, such a s the housing and re loca ti on element and the departme nt's antici pa ted part icipa tio n in the HUD 701 p la nning p rog ra m. He explained a federa l requireme nt fo r particip ati o n in the 701 progra m is that one portion of the p lanning studies be a housing study; further, the person ne l situation throughout the city , especia lly in the te ch nica l and p rofe ssiona l leve l', is getting' serious and the Planning Department ho pe s to so lve some o f its prob lem s by hiring tempo rary personnel on 701 planning programs w ho coul d move into permanent planning vacancies as they occu r. He went on to say these new requirements, particularly housing planning fo r low and moderate income families, points up the critical need for the Urban Information System �c. Minutes Planning and Development Committee July 18, 1969 - Page Four for the city, because of the various and sundry data which can be obtained from it on immediate notice, and he urged the committee's support in implementation of this system. He presented a draft of "Workable Program Five-Year Goals II and stated the city wi II be committed to these goals and emphasized the need to begin considering an advance two-year budget. Considerable discussion then ensued about the status of the Mayor's Housing Program. Colonel Jones of the Housing Resources Committee stated that the city is about halfway through the initial five-year program. He cited figures for the two and one-half year period, stating we have under construction and completed approximately 8,000 units, and we have in the pipeline more units than the original goal of 17,000. He sta ted, however, a lot of !re units in planning are being lost because we do not have properly zoned locations to put them on. Mr. Cook asked on what basis units are classified as being in the "planning stage". C·. .• Mr. Jones explained they are put in this category when a rezoning application is filed and a proposal is submitted; if the zoning is denied, they are taken out; that more zonings for this purpose have been denied than approved. He cited the loss of 21,000 units through recent rezoning denials . Mr. Cook state d this doesn't concur with figures he obtained from the Planning Department. Mr. Gladin explained the staff analysis referre d to was done about a ye ar ago and at that time the zoning approvals were running about 80-90%; that the staff is in the process of p reparing an up-to- date analysis o{ the housing program . Mr. Cook ds ked for and was furnished with a copy of Mr. Jones' late st housing report. Afte r a cu rsory examination, Mr . Cook expressed conce rn ab out the disc repancy in fi g ures contai ned in the repo rt and those sta ted ora lly by Colone l J ones. Being a me mbe r of the Zoning Committee, he state d he was tired of charges being made that the ci ty's housing goa ls we re not be ing me t because of rez oning de nial s as he did not be li e ve this to be the case, a nd he finds it very confusing and frustating to be unable to justify his positi on whe n he is unabl e to secure re li ab le statis tics; that he would Iike statisti cs differen ti a ting wha t pe rce ntage of the 8,000 uni ts quoted by Colone l J ones is ac tually low and moderate income housi ng . Mr. Kennedy stated he ha d ve ry strong rese rvations that this perce ntage was q uite low , that as stated by Mr. G ladi n , the Plann ing staff is in the process of ana lyz ing the Housing Program for the la st two and one- ha lf years a nd he fe lt this report would produce the type statistics Mr. Cook is looking for. C. �( _ Minutes Planning and Development Committee July 18, 1969 - Page Five -: Mr. Gladin stated he realized the problems in working with the housing figures, and again this points up the need for good management procedures, which need to be standardized, and the Urban Information System for quick delivery of these statistics over a period of time. He also commented on the need for more emphasis on the city's total housing needs. Mr. Cook directed the staff to prepare a letter for his signature to Colonel Jones requesting clarification on the following: l. Is the actual number of units under construction and completed for the last two and one-half years the 8,000 oral figure given by Colonel Jones, or the 12,000 figure in his report of May 15, 1969; 2. What percentage of this figure is for low and moderate income housing; 3. The method used for determining what is low and moderate income housing, the name of the projects and the number of units in each project. He stated that in looking at the May 15 report and oral figures by Colonel Jones, it would appear we a re moving backwards and this prompted Mr. Flanigen to remark he had no doubt but what the program is "slipping". _p.?) ~ it: it 1to.~1 ' w if) ~ w n. With additi anal reference to the housing question, Mr. Mahony stated that at the last meeting of the Housing Resources Committee, the Legal Panel discussed the need for establishing a Housing Planning Agency within the city government to relieve the Housing Resources Commi t te e membe rs who are present ly spending an inord inate amount of time doing su rveys and research in the field of housing . He stated the logical place for such a housing function would be in the Planning Depa rtment, particularly in light of the 701 planning p rogram; that the staff would like the committe e's support; and he prese nted a le tter for Mr. Cook 's signa tu re as Chai rman of the Planning and De ve lopmen t Commi ttee supporting the department's position . Colone l Jo ne s sta ted tha t the Legal Panel has been studying this matter, but the y have no t subm itted a posi tion report to Mr . Ale xander a nd he does not kn ow what type of report w il I be subm it te d if and whe n it is, and he felt any action by t his committee on this matter would be pre mature a t t his ti me . ~ ~ ~ Q:: 0 0 c·-~ C!) M r. Gladin stated the letter does not request an y fina l a ction; tha t it mere ly makes a recommendation for the Ho using Re sou rces Committee t o consider in making their recommendation. Colonel Jones stated he sti II felt the letter was in anticipation of something and prematu re. �Minutes Planning and Development Committee July 18, 1969 - Page · Six Mr. Mahony commented that the Planning Deportment fee Is very strong Iy about this and consequently wanted to take a positive approach, rather than waiting for a proposal from the Housing Resources Committee and reacting. The committee unanimously approved the letter and Mr. Cook appended his signature thereto. Referring back to the status report on the Workable Program, Mr. Gladin stated the staff hopes to present the final draft to this committee July 28, 1969 for review, and will request committee approval at a meeting on August I, 1969; it will then be forwarded to the ne x t meeting of the Board of Aldermen where, hopefully, it will be finally approved and hand delivered that same afternoon to HUD. This will give HUD ample review time prior to the October expiration date for last year's recertification. *** *** ** Mr. Mahony explained the City of Mountain View, Clayton County and the City of Atlanta have common problems in the Plunkettown area which require joint study and action to solve. The following Resolution to initiate such action was approved: - (~ A RESOLUTION BY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMM! TTEE WHEREAS, the City Planning Department is presen t ly studying the Plunkettown neighbo rhood for inclusion in the Atlanta 1970 Neighbo rhood Development Program, and WHEREAS, the Plunkettown neighborhood extends south of the Atlanta City Limits i nto t he City of Mountain View and Clayton County, and WH EREAS, Clayton County, Mountain View, and the City of Atlanta face common problem s in this area . NOW, THE REF O RE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor a nd Boa rd of Alde rmen o f the City of Atlanta that Mayor Iva n Allen , J r . reque sts the Boa rd of Comm issione rs of Clayton County and the Mayor and Coun ci l of the City of Mountain View to porti cipate in a joint stud y designed to slove the probl e ms of the Plunkettown neighborhood. (~ The committee heard from Charles Stinson, President of t he Federation of South\A.Elst Clubs, a report on the first phase of the Southwest Community Study, being done for the Federation by graduate planning students from Georgia Tech. A copy of the first study phase was presented to each committee member present for information and no action was requested . �Minutes Planning and Development Committee July 18, 1969 - Page Seven ( ,; @) Mr. Gladin informed the committee members that the Sign O rdinance had been approved by the Zoning Committee and he anticipated submitting it to the full Board of Aldermen for approval Monday, July 21, 1969, and would like this committee's support at the Monday meeting. He further informed them we wi 11 be working toward recruiting personnel to implement the ordinance, that he has requested by letter that Mr. William H. Wofford, Building Official, and the Personnel Board prepare a joint study on such personnel needs. .... <>• i "'... w CJ) ** ***** Mr. Gladin stated he had received a communication from the BOND (Bass Organization for Neightorhood Development) Community req~esting to appear before the committee to discuss being included in the 1970 NDP program; that he felt they should have this opportunity and he would like authorization to notify them to appear at the next meeting of the committee. <( w 0.. aj ~ ,,. --- '- 0 0 ( In answer to Mr. Flanigen, Mr. Gladin stated the freeway ramp question in the BOND area had not been resolved, but there are continuing discussions with Ray Nixon and the State Highway Department on the matter and he felt it could be worked out. .....I ~ The committee concurred for the BOND group to appear at the next meeting. m .***** **** There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. **** Approved : Rodney1500k, Chairma n Respectfully submitted: Joanne Parks, Secreta ry @) ~ / ( '- i ... "' u.J CJ) <( (J.J a.. ,."'( - - 1 • �·J AGENDA ZONING C0r1MITTEE Meeting, Thursday, July 24, 1969 Aldermanic Chamber, Second Floor , Ci ty Hall, 2:00 P. M. 1/U-69-34-S An Application f or a Special Use Permit for a church to be located at MACON DRIVE, f ronting 40 feet on the east side of Macon Dri ve, S.W., beginning 31 6 .5 f e~t north from the corner of Bromack Drive, S.W. Depth appro x i ma t ely 624 feet. Land Lot 70, 14th Di strict, Fulton County, Georgia. Mrs . Thelma Lois Mo r gan, Owner New Hope Baptist Church - Appl i cant Propos ed Use - Church (Planning Board, adverse r ecommenda t ion) WARD 4 iffaZ-69 - 93-S An Ordi nance to r e zone from A-1-C (Apartme nt-Conditional) Di strict to C-1 (Commerc i al) Di s tr i ct, prop ert y located at the Northeast corne r of OLD HAPEVILLE ROAD a nd CLEVELAND AVENUE , S. W., fronting 200 f ee t on the nor th s ide o f Cleve l a nd Avenue, S .W., beg inning 0 fe e t fro m t he nor theast c orne r of Old Hapeville Ro a d. Depth 456 fe e t . Are a 92,00 0 square fe e t. Land Lot 69, 14th Di strict, Fulton County, Georgi a . · Dr . Rob e rt B. Hodgson, Owner-App l i cant Proposed Us e - Off ice & Se rv i c e Sta tion (Plann i ng Boa r d, advers e r e commend ation) WARD 4 iffaZ-69-91 - S An Or d i na nc e t o re zone from R- 4 (Re si dential) District to A-1 - C (Apart me nt- Conditiona l) Di s trict , pro perty loca t ed at 2965 BROHNS MI LL ROAD, S .E. , fr onti ng 78 . 2 f e et on the west s i de of Browns Mi l l Road , begi nni ng 930 fe e t fro m the s out hwest corne r of Spri ngside Dr i ve . De pth 1,024 feet . Area approximat~ly 78 ,0 00 square fe et . La nd Lot 61 , 14th Di stri c t, Fulton County , Georgi a. William T. St anfie ld , Owne r Robert A. Young - Appli c a nt Proposed Us e - Apartment s WARD 4 (Planning Board, adverse r.e commendat_i on) · An Ordinance to rez one fr om R-4 (Residential )D i s tr i c t to A-1 (Apar t ment) Di strict, property lo cated at 311 6 BROHNS MILL ROAD , f r on ti ng 251. 5 feet on t he northeast side o f Browns Mill Road , beg inning 500 . 7 feet from the no r theast co r ner of Humph r ies Dr ive . Depth va r ie s . _Area 23 . 3 ac r e s . Land Lot s 35 & 62 , 14t h Di s t r i ct , Fult on County , Georg i a . Ruby All e ne Brooks & W. T . Atkinso n, Owne r s B &. H Compa ny - Applican t Propo s ed Us e - Apa rt me nt s (Planning Board, adve r s e recomme ndati on) WARD 4 1/Z- 69-89-S �ZONING COMMITTEE AGENDA Page· 2 July 24, 1969 ifrZ-69-84-s ·An Ordinance to rezone from A-1 (Apartment) Di strict to C-1 (Commercial) District, property located at J ONESBORO ROAD, fronting 652.5 feet on the southwesterly side of Jonesboro Road, beginn i ng 707.06 feet f ro m the southwe st corner of Macedonia Road. Depth 1048.43 feet. Area 16.4 acres . La nd Lot 34, 14th District , Fulton County, Georgia. The Mi litary Corpo r ation, Owner Theodore G. Frankel - Applicant Proposed Use - Shopp i ng Center & Office Park (Planning Board, favor able recommendation as amended to C-1-C) WARD 4 ifZ-69-80-S An Or dinance to r e zone f rom R-4 (Re s i dent ia l) District to A-2 (Apartment) District, property loca ted at 2946 & 2954 HAPEVILLE ROAD, S.H. , f r onting 192 feet on the east side of Ha pevi lle Road, S. W. , beginning 389 fe e t from the northeast corner of Mt. Zi on Road. Dep th 293.4 f eet . Ar ea 56,208 s quar e fee t. La nd Lot 68 , 14 th Di st rict , Ful to n County , Georgi a . Benj ami n F . Ma rti n, Owner-App lica nt Pr opo sed Use - Apartme nts (Planning Boar d, adverse recomme ndation) WARD 4 !IU- 69- 30- S An Applica t io n fo r a Spe c ia l Us e Permi t fo r a Day Nur s ery to be located at 3825 ADAMSVILLE DRIVE, S.W. , fronting 100 f ee t on the no rth s i de of Adams vi lle Dr i ve, S.W . , begi nni ng 393 . 7 fe e t east f rom the cor ner o f Woodstock Drive. Depth 200 feet. La nd Lot 14 , 14th FF Dis t ric t , Fulton Count y, Georgi a. Emma Hunt (Renfroe), Owner Doris Stri ck land - App l icant Pr opos ed Us e - Day Nu rsery (Planning Board, favor able r ecommendation) WARD 7 U-69-31-C An App l i cat io n f o r a Spe c i al Us e Permi t f or a Nur sing Home to be located at 120 LINE ROAD, S. W. , fr onting 252 feet o n the e ast side of Li ne Roa d, be ginni ng 680 f eet no r th from the co r ner o f Br anch Dr ive. D~pth 698 fe et. Land L6t 13, · 14 t h Dis t ric t , Ful t on County , Georgia ABDEC , I nc . , Owner- Appl icant Propos ed Use - Nursi ng home (Pla nning Boar d, favorable r ecomme ndation) WARD 7 Z- 69 - 85 - S An Or dinance to rezone from R-5 (Res ident ial) and A- 1 (Apartment) Di s t r icts to C- 1 (Commercial) Di stri ct, prope rty l ocate d at STEWART AVENUE, fronting 131 fe et on t he e a s t s ide of Stewart Avenue , b egi nning O feet from t he north c orner o f Grant Stree t . Depth 218 feet . Area 14,25& swuare f eet . La nd Lot 90, 14t h Dist r i ct, Fulton County, Georgia . Carrie Blake, Ow ner C. M. Mcche s ney ,- Appl i ca nt Proposed Use - Service Station WARD 4 (Planning Board , favorab l e recommendation) �ZONING.COMMITTEE AGENDA Page 3 July 24, 1969 ffaZ-69-83-S An Ordinance to rezone from R-3 (Residential) District to C-1 (Commercial) District, property located at 1955 CAMPBELLTON ROAD, fronting 260.7 feet on the north side of Campbellton Road, beginning O feet from the northeast corner of Honeysuckle Lane. Depth 212.1 feet. Area approximately 66,000 square feet. Land Lot 168, 14th District, Fulton County, Georgia. Perry Boulevard, Inc., Owner-Applicant Proposed Use - Service Station (Planning Board, favorable recommendation) WARD 7 ffaZ-69-94-S An Ordinance to rezone from C-L (Commercial-Limited) District to C-1 (Commercial) District, property located at 2860 CAMPBELLTON ROAD, S.W., fronting 120 feet on the south side o f Campbe llton Road, beginning 293 feet from the east corner of Naxwe ll Drive. Dep th 340 feet. Area 33,000+ · square feet. Land Lot 218, 14th D~strict, Fulton County, Georgia. Ellis Maloof, Owner-Applicant Proposed Use - Car Wash (Planning Board, favorable recomme ndat i on) WARD 7 ffaU-69-33-S An Application for a Specia l Use Permit for a Car Wash and Service Station, to . be located at 2360 CAMPBELLTON ROAD, S .H., fronting 120 feet on the south side of Campbel lton Road , beginning 293 f ee t east fro1:1 the corne r of Maxwe ll Drive. Depth 340 feet. Land Lot 218 , 14th Di s trict, Fulton County, Georgia. Ellis Maloo f, Owner-Appli ca nt Proposed Use - Car Wash & Servi ce Station (Planning Board , favo rab l e recommendation) WARD 7 Z-69-96-S An Ordi nance to re zone from R-4 (Residential) Di5trict to A-1 (Apartme nt) District, p r operty located at FAIRBURN ROAD, S.W., fronting 100 feet on the west side o f Fairburn Road, beginning 720 feet ,ram the . south ~orne r of . qarrison Drive . De pth 800± feet. Area 236,013 square feet. Land Lot 8, 14th FF District, Ful ton County, Georgia. D. E. Norr is, Owner E. Lane Brown-Applicant Proposed Use - Apartments (Planning Board, adverse recommendation) WARD 7 �AGENDA ATLANTA-FULTON COUNTY --JOINT PLANNING BOARD Meeting, Wednesday, November 12,1969 Committee Room #2, Second Floor, City Hall, 2:00 P.M. i!Z-69-154-N An Ordinance to rezone from R-4 (Residential) District to C-1 (Corranercial) District property located at 1265 BOULDERCREST DRIVE, S.E., fronting 231 feet on the West side of Bouldercrest Drive, beginning 175 feet from the northwest corner of Eastland Road. Depth 175 feet. Area 40,425 squ are feet. Land Lot 143, 15th District, DeKalb County, Georgia. Alford M. Williams & Ellis A. Maloof, Owner Ellis A. Maloof, Applicant Proposed Use - Foor store & dry cleaners WARD 2 i!U-69-68-N A~ Application f or a Special Us e Per mi t for a Chu~ch to be locate d at 1323 S. PONCE DE LEON AVE NUE , N. E., f ronting 182 feet on t he south side of Ponce de Leon Ave., N.E. beginning O fe et east from the corner of Springdale Road, N.E. Depth 240.4 feet. Land Lot 241, 15th District DeKabl County, Georgia. Elmer D. Lill ey, Owner Church of God of Prophe cy, Applicant Proposed Use - Church WARD 2 i!U-69-65-N An Application for a Special Use Permit for a Dent a l Fr a t ernity-Boarding House, to be located at 1315 PONCE DE LEON AVENUE N.E., f r cnt ing 15 2 . 4 fee t e n t he s outh side cf Ponce de Le on Avenue, beg i nning 170 feet wes t f rom the corner o f Springda l e Road. Dep th 220 fee t. Land Lot 241, 15th District, DeKalb County, Georgia. Delta Sigma Delta House, Inc., Owner Cliffor d Ox f ord , App l ican t Proposed Use - Dental Fra ter ni ty - Boarding House WARD 2 ( i!Z - 69 - 172 - C) An Oi dinance to r ezone f r om A- 2 (Apar tment) Dis t rict t o C- 1 (Commercial) Di s t rict proper t y located at 493,497 , _ 503,507 EAST AVENUE and 298 , 302 1 304 ~.ACKENZIE , fronting 180 f e e t on t he s outh s ide of East Avenue, begi nning 210 fee t f r om t he s outheast corner o f Bou levard . Depth 30 .5 fe et . Area 1 . 30 acres. Land Lot 46, 14th District , Fulton County, Georgia. Caduceus Properties, Owner Carl Cofer , Applicant Propos ed Us e - Park i ng Lot WARD 6 �ATLANTA-FULTON COUNTY JOINT PLANNING BOARD Wednesday, November 12 1 1969 - Page 2 /FU-69-66-G An Application f-0r a Special Use Permit for an Apartment above a store, to be located at 979 PIEDMONT AVENUE, N.E. fronting 45 feet on the easterly side of Piedmont Avenue, N.E., beginning 92.8 feet southwest from the corner of Tenth Street, N.E. Depth 175 feet. Land Lot 106, 17th District, Fulton County, Georgia. Augusto Silva, Owner-Applicant Proposed Use - Apartment WARD 5 f!U-69-69-C An Application for a Special Use Permit for Parking to be located at 1230 & 1236 PIEDMONT AVENUE, N.E.,fronting 236.7 feet on the northwest side of Piedmont Avenue, beginning 250.5 feet southwest from·the corner of South Prado, Depth approximately 160 feet. Land Lot 55, 17th District, Fulton County, Georgia. Morton Realty Company, Owner,Applicant Proposed Use - Parking WARD 5 f!Z-69-174-N An Ordinance to rezone from R-3 (Residential) District to 0-I (Office-Institutional) District, property located at 3783 ROSWELL ROAD, N.E., fronting 202 feet on the east side of Roswell Road, N.E., beginning 2,257.5 feet form the northeast corner of Ivy Road. Depth 835 feet. Area 70,700 square feet. Land Lot 97, 17th District, Fulton County, Geor gi a, Jeannette M. Prince, Owner,Applicant Proposed Use - Office & Apartments WARD 8 f!Z-69-183-N An Ordinance to rezone from R-4 (Residential) District to C-1 (Connnercial) District, property located at 2114 thru 2126 DEFOORS FERRY ROAD, front _ing 633 feet on the south side of DeFoors Ferry Road, beginning 698 feet from the northwest corner of Collier Road. Depth 422 feet. Area 174,428 square feet, Land Lots 185,186,&194, 17th District Fulton County, Georgia. H.W. Dunn, et al, Owner Initiated by Alderman G. Everett Millican Proposed Use - Service Station/Retail Uses WARD 3 f!Z-69-169-S An Ordinance to rezone from R-4 · (Residential) District to A-1 (Apartment) District, property located at 2905 SPRING DALE ROAD, fronting 206 feet on the west side of Springdale Road, beginning 990,7 feet from the southwest corner of S. Fredell Circle. Depth 665 feet. Area 3.7 acres. Land Lot 100, 14th District, Fulton County, Georgia, William H. Cook, Owner-Applicant Proposed Use - Apartments WARD 4 �ATLANTA-F1JLTON COUNTY JOINT PLANNING BOARD Wednesday, November 12, 1969 - Page 3 Z-69-175-C Z-69-176-C An Ordinance to rezon~ from R-9 (Townhouse) District to C-1 (Commerc~al) District, property located at PEYTON ROAD, fronting 325.0 feet on the east side of Peyton Road, beginning 340 feet from the southeast corner of Gordon Road. Depth 165.8 feet. Area 1.265± acres. Land Lot 205, 14th District, Fulton County, Georgia. Peyton Center, Inc., Ovmer - Applicant Proposed Use - Not stated WARD 7 An Ordinance to rezone from R-3 (Residential) District to A-L (Apartment-Limited) District, property located at LYNHURST DRIVE, fronting 381.09 feet on the west side of Lynhurst Drive, beginning 595.9 feet from the northwest corner of Hiawasee Drive. Depth 1,485± feet. Area 22.72 acres. Land Lot 236, 14th District, Fulton County, Georgia, R.T. Griffith, Owner - Applicant Pr.oposed Use - Apartments WARD 7 Z-69-171-C An Ordinance t6 rezone form R-5 (Residential) District to & 3401 SCOTT ST., S,W., fronting 497.3 feet on the North side of Scott Street, beginning O feet from the northeast cor ner of Brownlee Road. Depth 100 feet. Area 1.01 acres. Land Lot 245, 14th District, Fulton County, Georgia. Therori & Jackie Bolton, Owner Theron Bolton, Applicant Proposed Use - Apartments WARD 7 A-1 (Apartment) District, property located at 3335 Z-69-180-C An Ordinance to rezone from R-5 (Residential) Di s tr i ct to A-1 (Ap ar tmen t ) Di s trict, prop erty loc a t ed at SEWELL ROAD s.w., f r onting 570,2 fee t on the north s id e o f Sewell Road, beginning 1450 fee t from the nor theas t cor ne r o f Fairbur n Road. Depth 1,930 feet. Area 74.3 acre s. Land Lot 245, 14th District, Fulton County , Ge orgia. Blaclock Machinery, Owner Thornton Properti es , I nc., App l i cant Propo sed Us e - Apartments WAR,D 7 Z-69-178-S An Or di nance t o rezone from A- 1- C (Apartment -Conditional ) Distr i ct to C- 1 (Conuner cial) Distri ct, property lo cated at 2440 FAIRBUR~ ROAD , s. w., f r onti ng 60 feet on the east side o f Fai rbur n Road . S.W. , beginni ng 104 9 fe e t from the southe a s t corner of Campbellton Road, S .W ., Depth 792 fe e t. Area 4 a cres. Land Lot 5, 14th District , Fulton County, Georgia. Maude H. Wai ts , Owner David D. Warren, Applicant Proposed Use - Office Building WARD 7 �ATLANTA-FULTON COUNTY JOINT PLANNING BOARD Wednesday, November 12, 1969 - Page 4 ifZ-69-170-C An Ordinance to rezone for ·R-3 (Residential) District to C-1 (Commercial) District, property .1 .ocated at ADAMSVILLE DRIVE, S.W.,fronting 100 feet on the south side of Adamsville Drive, beginning 152 feet from the southwest corner of Gordon Road. Depth 197 feet. Area 25,672 square feet. Land Lot 14, 14th District, Fulton County, Georgia. J.I. Kingloff & Mildred L. Kingloff, Owner-Applicant Proposed Use - Not stated WARD 7 Z-69-177-C An Ordinance to rezone from R-5 (Residential) District to A-1 (Apartment) District, property located at 125 FAIRBURN ROAD, N.W., fronting 102.8 feet on the east side of Fairburn Road, beginning 811.9 feet from the northeast corner of Gordon Road. Depth 838.2 feet. Area 3.611 acres. Land Lot 243, 14th Distr ict, Fulton County, Georgia. Rosa G. Washington, Owner Kfng & Spalding, Applicant Proposed Use - Apartments WARD 7 fFU-69-67-C An Application for a Special Use Permit for a Day Care to be located at 633 HIGHTOWER ROAD, N.E., fronting 50 on the east side of Hightower Road, beginning 515 feet from the corner of Oldknow Drive. Depth 196.4 feet Lot 208, 14th District, Fulton County, Georgia. Mrs. Julie C. Ogletree, Owner-Applicant . WARD Proposed Use - Day Care Center 4/Z-69-179-C Center feet north Land 3 An Ordinance to rezone from R-5 (Residential) District to C-1 (Commercial) Di strict, property located at 2138 ,2098 & 2094 BANKHEAD HIGHWAY, fronting 75 & 133 feet on t he south side of Bankhe ad Highway, beginning O & 330 f ee t from the southeast corner of Alta Place. Depth 243 feet. Area 50,544 square feet. Land Lot 176, 14th District, Fulton County, Georgia. Initiated by Zoning Committee Proposed Use - Not stated WARD 3 �.) CITY OF .ATLANTA May 29, 1969 CITY HALL ATLANTA, GA. 30303 Tel. 522-4463 Area Code 404 DE PARTMENT OF PLANNING COLLIER B. GLADIN, Dir e c cor Mr. Johnny Robinson Community Development Coordinator Mayor•s Office City Hall Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Dear Johnny: Certification of Atlanta 1s Workable Program for Community Improvement expires on October I, 1969. The U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development requires that we make our submission by August I, 60 days in advance of the expiration date . Last year, we made our submission on time; we wou Id Iike to repeat the performance th is year . We are enclosing a copy of the newly revised Workable Program for Community Improvement HUD Handbook along with those portions of the Wo rkab le Program that pertain to your operation . Please note the changed requirements in the HUD Handbook . All Workable Program certifications have bee n ex tended over a two - yea r pe riod . The City of Atlanta will not submit another Wo rkable Program until 1971 . Therefore, we ask that you make su re you maintain th e required data pertaining to your depa rtment on a two- yea r basis. The report ing period for the Ju ne 31 Workable Prog ram for th is year is March 31, 1968 to June I, 1969. The Planning Department wi II be g la d to assi st you in any way possib le to get the wo rk done on time. At least a month 1s time is needed by us for assemb li ng exhibits, typing and re producing and generally tying up loose ends . Therefore, we must have the sections back by June 16. Sincerely yours , ~ Colli e r B. G ladin Planning Di rector CBG/bls Enclosure �·I I RH A 7100.1 ) • 0 l ROGR FOR COM U ITV I -PR Octo be r 1968 A HUD H D 00 U . S. DEPARTME N T OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT WASH I NGTON , D. C. 204 10 �• PREFACE FOR WORKABLE PROGRAM HANDBOOK 'Ihis Handbook sets forth a new approach and revised requirements to guide localities that are carrying out a Workable Program for Community Improvement. It represents the first major revision of the Workable Program procedures since enactment of the statutory provision in 1954-, We have several objectives which we hope will be achieved by the revision. One is to respond to the many changes that have taken place in our urban areas over the years. Another is to ensure that our requirements for the Workable Program are focused on performance by localities in dealing with the problem of slums and blight~-not just on compliance with operational procedures. Above all, the purpose is to give local communities both flexibility an4 the responsibility to develop effective programs to achieve the objectives of the statute in light of the particular nature of problems and conditions existing in each locality. ' ' '.Ihe substitution of performance standards for certain formal elements of the Workable Program does not represent any easing in current substantive requi rements. Nor does the Handbook envision any reduction in efforts by communities now participating in the program. The introduction of a performance-oriented approach hopefully will result in a more effective attack on the major problems facing the community. I am confident that, after more than a decade of experience with the Workable Program, the Federal-local partnership has the maturity to operate effectively under the new approach of this Handbook and thereby we can make more meaningful progress toward overcoming the urgent problems facing our cities and towns today. Robert C. Weaver Secretary 1 11/ 68 �WORKABLE PRCGRAM FOR COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT RHA 7100.11 • FOREWORD This Handbook sets forth revised policies, requirements, and procedures for communities required to carry out a Workable Program for Community Improvement in connection with the use of certain Departmental housing and renewal programs to help overcome probiems of slums and blight. -Workable Program Guides containing illustrative and advisory information will be issued to supplement this Handbook. The revised policies and requirements set forth herein are effective upon issuance of this Handbook. Tnose communities which already have submitted or· have substantially completed documentation in support of an application for certification or recertification of a Workable Program need not revise the material . However, communities may use the revised forms described in this Handbook immediately . After March 31, 1969, all applications for certification or recertification of a Workable Program must be in conformance with the revised policies and requirements. The primary objective of the revision is to provide a fle:x:i.ble and performance-oriented framework within which communities may demonstrate reasonable continuing progress toward· achieving the goals sought by the statutory requirement for a Workable Program and those established by the community to implement them. The revision also modifies reporting and documenta~ion requirements and provides new criteria for evaluating community performance. The revised Workable Program concentrates on four essential areas: a. The · adoption and enforcement of housing, building, and related codes. b. The establishment of an effective action-oriented planning and programming process. c. The developnent of programs to meet low- and moderate- income housing needs and to meet relocation needs of families , individuals, and business concerns displaced by governmental action. ii 11/68 �WORKABLE PROGRAM FOR COMMUNI'IY IMPROVEMENT • IRHA 7100.1 d. I The involvement of citizens, including poor and minority groups, in Workable Program activities and in related HUDassisted housing and renewal programs. The intent of this Handbook is to strengthen the Workable Program as a flexible and meaningful tool to help communities organize and carry out its community improvement programs. The Handbook envisions no lessening of effort by communities which h~ve been participating under previous Workable Program guidelines. Rather, it is anticipated that communities will make greater :grogress toward achieving the obj ectives of the statute with the increased flexibility provided by the Handbook to concentrate local efforts and tailor specific needs and problems facing the community. Applications for certtfic?tion in accordance with the requirements of this Handbook which propose a program with an overall leve l of effort below that made in the past, will not be acceptable. Certifications and recertifications of Workable Programs will be e ffective for two years. Field reviews of progress will be made as necessary by HUD Regional Office staff midway through the certification period to provide advice and t echnical assistance. HUD-assisted programs to which the Workable Program applies are listed in Chapter 1, paragraph 5. A community intending to make application for financial assistance under any of these pro grams should become familiar with the policies and requirement s set forth in this Handbook. An understanding of these policies and requirements will facilitate the preparation of the application for certification or recertification of the community 's Workable Program and thus help to expedite the processing of applications for financial assistance for specific programs. 10/ 68 iii �J - HtJD REGIONAL OFFICES RIDIONAL ADMINISTRATOR ADDRESS AND TELEPHONE NUMBER I Judah Gribetz 26 Federal Plaza, New York, N.Y. 10007 Area Code 212 264-8068 Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode· Island, Vermont n Warren P. Phelan Widener Bldg., 1339 Chestnut St., Philadelphia, Pa. Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland, New Jersey, Pennsylvania Virginia, West Virginia RIDION 19107 GENER.AL JURISDICTIONAL AREA Area Code 215 597-2560 III Edward H. Baxter Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee ~ 0 ..... < e:: Peachtree-Seventh Bldg., Atlanta, Ga. 3032~ Area Code 404 526-5585 ~ ~ >tj IT Francis D. Fi.sher 360 North Michigan Ave., Chicago, Ill. 60601 Area Code 312 353-5680 Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio,. South Dakota, Wisconsin V W.W. Collins Federal Office Bldg., 819 Taylor St., Fort Worth, Texas 76102 Area Code 817 334-2867 Arkansas, Colorado, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas 450 Golden Gate Ave., Post Office Box 36003, San Francisco, Calif. 94102 Area Code 415 556-4752 Alaska, Arizona, California, Guam, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Washington, Wyoming x:, Q ' VI I-' ~ VII co °' Robert B. Pitts Jose E. Febres-Silva Post Office Box 3869, GPO, San Juan, P.R. 00936 (Dial Long Distance Operator) Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands ~ x:, 0 0 ~z H 1-3 1-<1 ~ ~~ -.J I-' 0 0 •I-' <: 1-3 767-1515 V ·-· �WORKABLE PROGRAM FOR COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT I • RHA 7100.11 TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE FOREWORD HUD REGIONAL OFFICES CHAPTER 1. SUMMARY OF WORKABLE PROGRAM PURPOSES AND REQUIREMENT Paragraph 1. Statutory Provision · 2. Basic Purpose of Statutory Provision 3, Summary of Workable Program Requirements Local Administrative Requirements 5- \ HUD-Assisted Pro grams for Which Workable Pro gram Is A Requirement CHAPTER 2. .., GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATION OF WORKABLE PROGRAM APPLICATIONS 1. General Principles of Administration 2. Requirements for Application Content 3. Criteria for Evaluation of Workable Program Application 4. Basis for Determining Acceptability CHAPTER 3. ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS AND PROCEDURES FOR WORKABLE PROGRAM CER TIFICATION 1. Filing of Application for Certification 2. Governing Body Approval of the Workable Program 3. Notification of Approval or Disapproval. 4. Certification Period 5. Certification Lapse 6. Technical Assistance to Communities V 11/68 �WORK.ABLE PROGRAM FOR COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT I RHA 7100.1 " I ,I Paragraph 7. Relationship of Workable Program and Urban Renewal Requirements 8. Availability of Workable Program as Public Document 9. Guides CHAPTER 4. CODES AND CODE ENFORCEMENT 1. Statutory Provision 2. Requirements for Code Adoption 3. Rehabilitation Standards 4.·..> , Requi rements for Code Enfor cement 5. Examples of Priority Areas 6. Considerat i ons Relate d to ·code Enforcement CHAPTER 5. PLANNING AND PROGRAMMI NG 1. Planning and Programming Objectives 2. Comprehens ive Planning Requirements 3. Programming Requireme nts 4. Charact er i stic s of Planning Process 5. Summary CHAPTER 6. HOUSING AND RELOCATION 1. Gen~ral Provisions 2. Relocation Requirements 3. Housing Requ i rements 4. Crite~ia for Evaluation of Applications CHAPTER 7. 1. 11/ 68 CITIZEN I NVOLVEMENT Requirements f or Citizen Involvement Vi -- ---. ' �WORKABLE PROGRAM FOR COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT RHA 7100.11 Paragraph 2. Principles and Purposes of Citizen Involvement 3. Examples of Citizen Involvement Activities 4. Criteria for Evaluation of Applications CHAPTER 8. GUIDELINES FOR WORKABLE PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION FOR SMALL COMMUNITIES 1. General Provisions 2. Special Provisions 3. Criteria for Review and Evaluation of Workable Program Application V , CHAPTER 9, ' ~- GUIDELINES FOR WORKABLE PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION FOR INDIAN RESERVATIONS 1. General Provision.§ , 2. Special Obj ectives 3, General Criteria for Review and Evaluation of Applications 4. Provision for Code Adoption and Enforcement 5, Planning Provisions 6. Housing and Relocation Provisions 7, Citizen Involvement Provisions vii 10/68 �I WORKABLE PROGRAM FOR COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT " R1!A 7100.1] CHAPTER 1 CHAPTER 1. 1. SUMMARY OF WORKABLE PROGRAM PURPOSES AND REQUIREMENTS STATU'IORY PROVISION. The Housing Act of 1949, as amended, requires as a condition of certain financial assistance, the following: 11 ••• a workable program for co~unity improvement (which shall include an official plan of action, as it exists from time to time, for effectively dealing with the problem of urban slums and blight within the community and for the establishment and preservation of a well-planned community with well-organized environment for adequate family life) for utilizing appropriate private and public resources to eliminate and prevent the develoµnent or spread of slums and urban blight, to encourage needed urban rehabilitation, to provide for redevelopnent of blighted, deteriorated, or slum areas, or to undertake such of the aforesaid activities or other feasible community activities as may be suitably employed to achieve the objectives of such a program." The statute also requires the ad.option and effective enforcement of a minimum standards housing code, as described in Chapter 4. In addition to the Workable Program requirements contained herein, communities are advised that various HUD-assistance programs may contain additionab separate requirements tailored to meet specific program needs (e.g. relocation requirements of the urban renewal program, general planning requirements for water and sewer, or open space land grants). See Chapter 3, paragraph 7, for further information. 2. BASIC PURPOSE OF STATU'IORY PROVISION. The basic purpose of the Workable Program requirement is to ensure that communities desiring to utilize funds for renewal and housing programs understand the array of forces that create slums and blight and are willing to recognize and .take the steps within their power to prevent and overcome urban blight. The Workable Program is based on recognition that the Federal and local relationship is one of partnership in the task, and that Federal funds for renewal and housing projects cannot, by themselves, be effective unless localities exercise the full range of their powers in community efforts on a sustained and coordinated basis to the objective of preventing and eradicating slums and blight. 3. SUMMARY OF WORKABLE PROORAM REQUIREMENTS, The specific requirements of the Workable Program are based on the statutory objectives described above and are designed to provide a flexible framework Page 1 u/63 �T WORKABLE PRCGRAM FOR COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT " I l RHA 7100.1 J CHAPTER 1 for organizing community efforts to eliminate and prevent slums and blight. The Workable Program calls for progress in the following four areas: a. Code Adoption and Enforcement. The adoption of housing, building, and related codes, and development of an effective code enforceme nt program which is at least adequate to de a l with areas having high priority need for en£orcement, including both blighted areas and basically sound but deteriorating neighborhoods, and which is gear ed toward eventual community-wi de compliance with such codes. b. Planning and Programming. The establishment of a continuing public planning and programming process which develops action programs within a comprehensive planning framework for overcoming the major physical, social, and e conomic problems related to the slum and blighted areas of the community, and for establishing and preserving a well- planned community with suitable l i ving environment for family life . c. Housing and Relocation. The development of a centralized or coordinated program for assisting in the relocation of all persons and business concer_n;, displace d by public action in the community and the development of a proi~ ~ to expand the supply of housing for l ow- and mode rate-inc0u1E. famili es on the basis of equa l opportunity. d. Citizen Involvement . The establishment of programs designed to achieve meaningful involvement of citizens, including poor and minority groups , in planning and carrying out HUD-ass i sted programs related to th e Workable Program. A detailed explanati on of th e policies and r equirements for each of the above four areas is s e t forth in subseque nt chapte rs of this Handbook. 4. LOCAL ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS. In carrying out Workabl e Program responsibil i ties, many different local agencies and offices will necessarily b e involved, together with various public a nd private institutions, organization s , and individuals. For e xample , building departments, planning agencies, health offices, housing authorities, urban renewal agencies, neighborhood organizat i ons, private builder s and dev e l opers may b e involved to proyide the wide range of resources needed to meet Workable Program obj ectives. While no specific a dministrative s tructure i s r equired by the Workable Progr am, a community will be expect e d to meet t he gene ral r equirement for establi shme nt of an administrative me chanism 11/68 Page 2 �,. WORKABLE PRO'.}RAM FOR COMMUNITY I MPROVEMENT I RHA 7100.11 CHAPTER 1 responsible to the chief executive for the purpose of providing leadership, supervision, and coordination of Workable Program activities. 5, ... HUD-ASSISTED PROJRAMS FOR WHICH WORKABLE PROGRJI.M IS A REQUIREMENT a. Urban Renewal Prog_ram b. Neighborhood Developnent Program c. Concentrated Code Enforcement Program d. Interim Assistance for Blighted Areas e. Demolition Grant Program f. Community Renewal Program g. Gene ral Neighborhood Renewal Plan h. Rehabilitation loans and gr ants in urban r enewal and concentrated code enforcement areas and in other than urban r enewal or concentrate d code enforcement areas a ssisted under the provision of Sec. 115(a)(2) and Sec. 312(a)(1). i. Low-Rent Housing Program, except for Section 23, Short Term Leased Housing. j. Mortgage in sura nce under FHA Sec. 220 for housing construction and rehabilitation in urban renewal project areas. k. Mortgage insura nce under FHA 221(d)( 3) at marke t or belowmarke t inter est r at e proj ect s for low- and moderate -income famili es. 1. Re nt Supplement Proj ects under Sec . 22 l ( d)( 3 ) for low-income families, with certain exception s . 338-597 0 - 6 9 - 2 Page 3 10/68 �I I WORKABLE PROORAM FOR COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT • CHAPTER 2 CHAPTER 2. .., RHA 7100. l GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATION OF WORKABLE PROORAM APPLICATIONS 1. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF ADMINISTRATION. Workable Program applications will be evaluated in light of the varying conditions, backgrounds, problems, and traditions of the par-ticula~ community. In view of the difficulty of establisQing predetermined standards of compliance having equal applicability to all communities throughout the nation, the Department's review and determination will be guided by the statutory requirements, the adequacy of the community's proposed effort as measured against the magnitude of the job to be done, and the constraints of available Federal, State, and local resources. A second major consideration governing the evaluation of application for recertification will be evidence of reasonable continuing progress toward meeting the statutory goals and objectives and -those set forth by the community. 2. REQUIREMENTS FOR APPLJs;:.ATION CONTENT. The Workable Program is the locality's program, and it i s the r esponsibility of the locality to establish goals, action programs , and time t able s for accomplishment in each of the four elements discussed in subsequent chapters. The goals, action programs, and timetables must be approved by the Department, except where otherwise indicated in Chapter 5, pa r agraph 3. Because the emphasis is on the locality 's responsibi l ity to develop its own program tailbred to its own needs and abilities rather than on complying with speci fic Departmental requirements, the community's application must contain sufficient evidence and detail to permit an objective basis for review and evaluation . Therefore, the application must clearly and specifically describe what the community inte nds to do during the next certification period in each of the four Workable Program elements. When applying for r ecertification, the application must also clearly describe what ste ps the community t ook in the l ast period, in order to provide a basis for measurement of the community ' s continuing progress toward meeting the agree d-upon goals and objectives. In developing its "work program" in each of the four elements for the next certification period , the community must also show how the proposed act ivit ies are related to a n analysis of the problems or needs, and t o longer-range tar ge t s for accomplishment. For exampl~ in deve loping a program to meet the r equirement of Chapter 6 to expand the supply of housing for low- and moderate-income families, the applicat ion should show the relationship of it s proposed program and timet ables to an anal ysis of needs in the community and to its longer-range goals or targe ts for expansion of such supply. The questions included in Application Form 1081 are designed to e licit the information and evidence required to provide a reasonable basis for approving or disapproving the community ' s Workable Program Application. Page 1 10/68 �WORKABLE PROGRAM FOR COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT ~HA 7100.1 • I \ ) CHAPTER 2 3. 4. CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION OF WORKABLE PROGRAM APPLICATION. In reviewing a community' s application for certification or recertification of a Workable Program, the Department's assessment will be based on the followin g factors: a. Problem Analysis. Adequacy of the community's analysis of the problems and needs where required by the Workable Program elements. b. Long-Ra nge Goals . Adequacy and reasonableness of the longrange goals and targets for accompli shment proposed by the community for overcoming such problems . c. Action Programs. Adequacy of the specific a ctions and timetables proposed- to be taken by the community during the next period of certification to deal with the problems identifi ed, in light of available resource s and the magnitude of the problems . d. Progress. Demonstration of r easonable continuing progress toward meeting goals and objectives specified by the community. BASIS FOR DETERMINING ACCEPTABILITY . The acceptability of a community's initi a l appl ication for ; certification will be base d on the adequacy of the problem or nee d ana lysis in each of the e l ement s , th e extent to whi ch longer-range goals or targe t s have been identifi ed in r e lation to need, and the adequacy of the proposed action programs, in light of both need and available resources . The acceptability of an application for r ecertifi cation will b e based on t he performance of the community in meeting the goa l s, t argets, and timetable s agr ee d to at the last certification, as well as on the extent to which the proposed l ev e l of e f f ort r epresent s continui ng progr ess fr om the l a s t per i od t oward meeting its longer-range targe t s . When unexpe cte d developments or changed conditions prevent a community from meeting its agr eed- to obj e ctives and time tabl~s, the application for r e certificat ion must include a de tailed explanation of the r ea sons . .) 10/68 Page 2 �WORKABLE PROGRAM FOR COMMUNITY IMPROVEMEN'T' I RHA 7100.11 CJW>TER 3 ,, CHAPTER 3. 1. ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS AND PROCEDURES FOR WORKABLE PROGRAM CERTIFICATION FILING OF APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATION. Form HUD-1081 is to be used by the community to apply for certification or recertification of its Workable Program. Careful attention to the preparation of format and content will obviate the need for correspondence with the community and thus help to expedite the review and evaluation of the application and its approval. An original and three copies of Form HUD-1081 are to be submitted to the appropriate HUD Regional Office. An application for recertification should be submitted at least 60 days prior to expiration of the community's current Workable Program certification. A community desiring to discuss Workable Program policies and requirements or to obtain assistance and guidance in the preparation of the required Form 1081 should communicate with the HUD Regional Office. 2. GOVERNING BODY APPROVAL OF THE WORKABLE PROO-RAM. Before being submitted to the Regional Office, the application for certification and recertification on Form HUD-1081 must be approved by the executive head and the governing~- body of the community. 3. NOTIFICATION OF APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL. The HUD Regional Office will advise the applicant community of approval or disapproval of the Workable Program application for certification. a. Reasons for Disapproval or Conditional Approval. Applicati9ns may· be disapproved or conditionally approved for ~ither of two reasons listed below; an explanation of the basis for such action will be provided to the community. (1) Failure by the community to carry out the plan of action and timetable it proposed for the last certification period. In the event of disapproval or conditional approval for this reason, the community will be advised of the actions it must take to carry out the plans or steps it initially proposed but did not take and did not provide justification for not taking. ( 2) Inadequacy of plans, programs, and timetables -proposed by the community for the next certification period. In the event of disapproval or conditional approval for this reason, the community will be informed of the nature of Page 1 10/ 68 �WORKABLE PROGRAM FOR COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT I Rl!A 7100.1 • I CHAPTER 3 the inadequacy of its proposed plans and programs, and will be requested to submit additional information needed to remedy such inadequacies. b. 4. Time Limit. Applications that are conditionally approved will provide a reasonable, definite time limit for accomplishment of required actions. In the event of a conditional approval, applications for financial assistance under the applicable HUD programs will be processed, but final approvals will be withheld until the Workable Program is fully approved. ( Once a community's application is approved, no further requirements will be imposed during the period of certification.) CERTIFICATION PERIOD. All Workable Program certifications are for a two-year period. If certification of a Workable Program has expired, the execution of contracts for assistance is precluded with respect to the applicable programs listed in Chapter 1, paragraph 5. Certification is deemed not to expire, however, but rather to continue in effect for the following purposes: a. To provide Federal assistance under Title I of the Housing Act of 1949 for any urban project in the locality with respect to which a loan and grant contract is executed prior to the expiration date. -~.-: i b. To provide Federal assistance under the United States Housing Act of 1937 for any low-rent public housing being undertaken by the locality with respect to which a contract for annual contributions or capital grant is executed prior to the ex-. piration date. c. To provide mortgage and home improvement loan insurance under Section 220 of the National Housing Act with respect to property in the locality situated in: 10/68 (1) The area of any urban renewal project for which a loan and grant contract is executed prior to the expiration date, or (2) Any urban renewal area not involving Federal aid under Title I of the Housing Act of 1949 respecting which prior to the expiration date the Secretary of Housing and Urban Developnent has certified that he has approved the urban renewal plan for the area, that such plan conforms to the general plan for the locality as a whole, and that there exist the -necessary authority and financial capacity to ensure the completion of such urban renewal plan . Page 2 �WORl<".ABLE PROORAM FOR COMMUNITY JMffiOVE:MENT I • RHA 7100.11 CHAPTER 3 d. 5, To provide mortgage insurance under Section 221(d)(3) of the National Housing Act with respect to property in the locality for which a pre-application analysis has been made by the Federal Housing Administration and it has agreed in writing to accept a formal application prior to the expiration date, or located in the area of any urban renewal project for which a loan and grant contract is executed prior to the expiration date. CERTIFICATION LAPSE. Where a Workable Program certification has expired and a lapse has occurred , the community will be required to show the progress made in meeting Workable Program r equirements not only during the period in which the Workable Program was in effect, but also during the lapse d period. Thus, it is important that a community anticipate the expiration -date and initiate the actions necessary to prepare an application for recertification sufficiently in advance of this dat so that lapse may be avoided. 6. .'TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TO COMMUNITIES . 7, RELATIONSHIP OF WORKABLE PR(X;RAM AND URBAN RENEWAL REQUIREMENTS. Communities intending to apply for urban renewal assistance should be aware of the following statutory requirements: In accordance with Section lOl(d) of the Housing Act of 1949, as amended, the Department will endeavor to the maximum extent possible, to assist communities in meeting their Workable Program objectives. Field reviews of progress will be made as necess~ry midway through the period of certification and Regional Office staff will be available to the ext ent resources permit to provide consultation , advice , and t echnical assistance. a. No loan or grant contract may be e ntered into for an urban renewal project unless the Workable Program 11 is of sufficient scope and content to furnish a basis for evaluation of the need for the urban renewal project, and such project is in accord with the program. 11 b. The plan for an urban r enewal project must "conform to the general plan of the locality as a whole and to the Workable Program . . . " c. In entering into any contract for advances for surveys, plans, and other preliminary urban renewal work, the Secretary must "give consideration to the extent to which appropriate local public bodies have undertaken positive programs (through the adoption, modernization, administration, and enforcement of housing, zoning, building and other local laws, codes, and regulations . . . ) for (1) preventing the spread or recurrence Page 3 10/68 �i' WORKABLE PROGRAM FOR COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT I RHA 7100.1 J CHAPTER 3 in the community of slums and blighted areas, and (2) encouraging housing cost reductions through the use of appropriate new materials, techniques, and methods in land and residential planning, design, and construction, the increase of efficiency in residential construction, and the elimination of restrictive practices which unnecessarily increase housing costs." d. HUD will not authorize a Federal aid contract for a Neighborhood Development Program (NDP) unless there is in existence a certified Workable Pro gram which is of sufficient scope and content to furnish a basis for evaluation of the need for the proposed NDP activities and such activities are in accord with the Workable Program. Communities are advised that because of the above statutory provisions, requirements for urban r enewal assistance may differ from those nec essary for Workable Program certification purposes in the following ways: a. Evaluation of Urban Renewal Need. With respect to subparagraphs a. and d., above, a community int ending to apply for urban renewal or NDP assistance should ensure that the studies undertaken in connection with the planning and programming requirement describ ed in Chapte;r, 5 are of sufficient scope and quality to provide a basis for evaluation of the need for the urban renewal project or NDP activities. In general, the studies carried out under th e Workable Program should be adequate to determine that the area is sufficiently blighted or deteriorated to qualify for an urban renewal or NDP program. Information should be included to illustrate both building and environmental deficiencies, such as overcrowded conditions, exce·ssive densiti es, and so forth . For further information on urban renewal eligibility requirements see RHA 7205.1 of the Urban Renewal Handbook, Chapter 1, General Eligibility Requirements. A community may, if it so wishes, supplement its' Workable Program submission with other related studies having a bearing, such as a Community Renewal Pro gram, General Neighborhood Renewal Program, or other similar studies. b. Renewal Plans. With respect to b ., above, the Urban Renewal Handbook sets forth the following minimum elements of a general plan: land use plan, thoroughfare plan, community facilities plan, public improvement s program, zoning ordinance and map and subdivision regulations . The preparation of such plans ( except for a zoning ordinance or other comparable memo for guiding land usage) is not a prerequisite to the approval of the Workable Program, though many communities may find the preparaof them helpful in the development of general plans to guide 10/68 Page 4 �I.. I WORKABLE PROGRAM FOR COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT RHA 7100.11 CHAPTER 3 • community growth and development, which is a Workable Program requirement describ ed in Chapter 5. In addition, for purpose s of approving specific urban renewal proj ects, a greater de gree of planning completion may be required than would be necessary for Workable Program purposes, e spe cially in smaller communities and others seeking initial certification or recertification. c, .., Codes. With respect to c., above, a community intending to apply for urban renewal assistance is advised that approval of the housing, building , and other code r equir ements of the Workable Pro gram will constitute compliance for urban. r e newal purpose s with Se ction lOl(a) of the Housing Act of 1949, and no additional information will be r equired for that purpo s e. 8. AVAILABILITY OF WORKABLE PR03RAM AS PUBLIC DOCUMENT. Since th e Workable Pro gram is a publi c docume nt , i t must be made available for public perusal a nd examination. At the ir reque st, copies should be made available by the locality to citizen groups and organizations which should be encourage d to participate in the 'develoµn ent and implementation of the Workable Pro gram. 9. GUIDES . Supplementary guide s will be issue d to provide communities with advi ce and illustrat ions in conne ction with carryi ng out the Workable Pro gr am, including des crJption of the s cope a nd conte nt of compr ehensive pl~nni ng progr ams, ways of organizing and carrying out effe ctive r e lo cation and code enforcement pro grams, and means for encouraging and deve loping citi zen involvement. Pending i ssuance of the Guides , questions and r eque sts for technica l assistance should be dire ct ed to the Regional Offi ce. Page 5 10/68 �WORKABLE PROGRAM FOR COMMUNITY IMPROVEMEN'r RHA 7100.1 • CHAPTER 7 CHAPTER 7. CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT 1. REQUIREMENTS FOR CITIZEN I NVOLVEMENT. A guiding principle of Departmental policy is to in sure that citizens have the opportunity to participate in policies and prograijls which affect their welfare. Therefore, the Workable Program requires clear evidence that the community provides opportunities for citizens, including those who are poor and members of minority groups, to participate in all HUD assisted programs for which a Workable Program is a requirement, and in the community's plan to expand the supply of low- and moderate-income housing. (S ee Chapter 1, paragraph 5 for li st of applicable HUD programs.) The community will also be expected to show what progress has be en made durin g each certification period to achi eve an adequate and effective degree of citizen involvement. 2. PRINCIPLES AND PURPOSES OF CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT, The growing complexity of urban deve lopme nt and gove rnment organization make it essential that widespr ead opportunities for citizen involvement be created, including opportunities for poor and minority groups, for many reasons. In some cases, existing local institutions seem unable to identify the serious proplems of many citizens, as the citizens define them. In turn, th e people may feel cut off from their public r epresentative·s', and lack understanding of what government is doing to and for them. At the same time, traditional acts of pa rticipa.tion--voting , attendance at meetings, letters to Congressmen-- are frequently ineffective in dealing with the immediate problems raised by increasingly l ar ge and complex programs having direct impact on peoples' lives. For these reasons, new forms of collaborative relationships between citizens and government, new means for participation in the decision-making process, need to be developed. Recognizing th e need for experimentation and innovation, the Workable Program does not contain any specific requirements for the form that citizen participation must take. Tne choice of mechanisms depends upon the needs of the particular community and the structure of the local government. However, there are certain principles and objectives which should underlie the community's effort. One is that the community's responsibility does not end with the establishment of a particular mechanism or . set of mechanisms. The Workable Program requires continuing effort on the part of the community to improve and expand the opportunities for creative forms of participation and collaboration that both ensure repres entation by poor and minority groups. as well as enable government to take effective, purposeful, and expert action to deal with the problems and needs facing the community. It is essentia l that the participation be satisfying, rewarding, and not frustratin g if it is to achieve the basic objective of cr eating and sustaining a vo luntary union and mutual trust between governand its citizens. p 338- 597 0 - 60 - J Page 1 11/68 �WORKABLE PROORAM FOR COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT I RHA 7100.1 " CHAPTER 7 3, EXAMPLES OF CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT ACTIVITIES. It is important that the community deve lop specific plans for achieving and maintaining adequate and e ffective citizen involveme nt in the programs covere d. A community may establish a new community-wide advisory committee embracing all major interests~ including the poor and members of minority groups or may create several new special-purpose groups, or may make b ette r utilization of existing organi zations. Communities which already have establishe d ef.fective citizen advisory committees for Workable Program purposes are encouraged to retain them and improve their effectiveness. Communities participating in the Mode l Cities program or other programs involving a high degree of citizen participation are encouraged to coordinate the citizen involvement activities under the Workable Program with the citi zen pa rtic ipat ion r equirements of th ese programs , where applicable. In addition to establishing appropriate organizational means for citizen involvement, a community may wish to take such steps as the following in orde-r - t o- further the objectives of this element: a. .. .. , , , b. The developfilent of specific function s for c itizen committees, such as having t hem hold public hearings , prepare comments on Workable Program appli cation s , evalua t e proj ect pla n s , conduct interviews and surveys of neighborhood residents ' views, etc. The development of specific methods by which the community can establi sh a basis for insuring there will be fa ir and reasonable r epr esentativeness of advisory committee s participa ting in th e Workable Program. For example , one method by which to compo se a community-wide advisory committee might be to choose repres entatives in equal proportions, from private neighborhood groups, government program-connected advisory groups, and civic groups. / 4. c. The establi shment of a planning group t o he l p develop new ideas and t e chniques for generating greater involvement among poor and di sadva ntaged groups . d. The pr ovision of funds and technical assistance to neighborhood and other advisory groups so they may become be tter informed and equippe d t o deal with complex redevelopment problems. e. The assignment of specific activities in HUD- assiste d pro j ects to de signate d ne ighborhood groups, such as evaluating site and design cons ide r ations, e stablishing information centers, and making recommendations with r espect to housing project regulation s. CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION OF APPLICATIONS. To provide a basis for .e valua ting the citize n involveme nt el ement of Workable Program ll/ 68 Page 2 �WORKABLE PROORAM FOR COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT I RHA 7100.~ CHAPTER 7 • applications and for determining the adequacy of such involvement, the community will be expected to submit the following kinds of information: a. A description of the arrangements or working relationships established to provide citizen groups with opportunities for access to the decision-making pro.cess with respect to the related HUD-assisted projects related to the Workable Program. b. A description of the nature and range of issues with which the participating groups and individuals have dealt, the recommendations subsequently made, and the general results and accomplishments derived from such involvement. c. A description of the specific steps the community took in the preceding period and proposes to take in the next certification period to achieve or maintain an adequate and effective degree of citizen involvement, including plans for providing sufficient information, technical assistance, and access to decision-making. \.>, Page 3 10/68 �HUD-1081 (11-68) CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT REQUIREMENT. The Workable Program requires clear evidence that the community provides and continues to expand, opportunities for citizens, especiall y tho se who are poor and members of minority groups, to participate in all phases of the related HUD-assisted renewal and housing programs. The particular organizational means for community involvement is left to the discretion of each community, but the community mu s t demon s trate in its Workable Progra m submission that it provides clear and direct access to decision making, relevant and timely information, and necessary technical assistance to participating groups and individuals in programs covered. 1. (a) Identify the groups participating in the HUD-assisted programs related to the Workable Program and in the community's program to expand the supply of low- and moderate-income hou sing. (b) Describ e the type of groups (e.g. civic, neighborhood, hous ing) that are participating, and the constituency repre sented (e.g. poor, middle-class, Negro, public hous ing res idents ) • • 18 • �HUD·! 081 (11-68) (c) Describe what pa rticular HUD-ass is ted programs and proj ects s uch groups a re parti ci pating in . • (_., ., (d) Desc ribe efforts to achi eve coordination among cit.izen participation structures loc ated in the same area or having s imilar program inte res ts. · - 19 - �HUD-1081 (11-68) 2. Describe the arrange ments or working re lations hips s et up to provide groups a nd indi vidua ls opportunities for access to a nd partici pa tion in deci s ion-making in the a ppli cabl e HUD-ass isted progra ms • • 3. Des cribe the s te ps whi ch have been taken in regard to the applicable programs to provide participating groups a nd individua ls s uffi c ie nt information a nd techni ca l ass is tance . 4. Des cribe the nature a nd range of issues re lating to the applicable programs with whi ch participa ting groups and individua ls have dealt; the recommenda tions s ubs eque ntly made; and the s pec ific res ul ts and accomplis hments of the partic ipa tion. • 20 U. S. GOVERNMENT P RINTING OFFICE: 1068 0 - 327 - 649 �CITY OF A.TLANTA. May 30, 1969 CITY HALL ATLANTA, GA. 30303 Tel. 522-4463 Area Code 404 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING COLLIER B . GLADIN , Dir e ctor MEMORANDUM TO: Jof1) Robi ~son FROM: c~ SUBJECT: Summer Program 1 69 Our contacts with the Summer Program for all matters except zoning will be George Aldridge and for zoning, Tom Shuttleworth . CG/jp �r . FUl'f0I NG OF URBAN R.EN:SW1~L AND lIBJ.GHBOREOOD DEVELO?i:,fENT PROGB}J,1 PROJ ECTS APRI L 29, 1969 . . �-I ,- . '---· · The City of Atlanta is pres ent ly engaged in eight Urban Renewal Projects and five Neighborhood Developme nt Program Projects (3 in execution, 2 in Thes e projects are fund ed jointly by the City and the planning only). Federal Governmen t. The funding arrangement calls for a contribution equal to one~third of the Net Project costs from tha City with the· re~ rnaini.ng two--thirds being suppJied by ·che Federal Gov ernmen t. The City's share may b e in the form of ca sh contributions or non-ca sh grants-in-aid, th e se grnrits-in- aid are demo lition and removal work, project or site i ~prov eme nt s , public and supporting facilities, and other s such as credits fro~ construc~ion of public housings. At pres ent, the eight Urb an Ren rn-1 al project~ presently in execution are Slunrna rized as follows: Net Project Costs Local Non- Cash Gra nts-In-Aid Local Cash and Real Estate Cr edits $60 millionl 20 rn:i.llion 1 million This points very emphatically to th e feet that our prese nt Urban Renewa l program has been financed al mos t comp l e tely through the use of non-cash grants·· in-aid. The res ults of this policy can be seen in th_e long delays encountered in the clo sing out of these projects, some of which date back into the 1950 's·. The cash used for these projects has cor:ie frcr:rt money set aside in the 1957 and 1963 Genera l Obl igat ion Bond Issue s and totaling $3.2 milliono There- fore, we have, at present, $2.1 million of unencu:.1bered fun ds available f:rom this source. Of this amount, $1. 7 is presently expected to be needed lof this amount $4.5 mi llion or 7\% has been incurred as interest charges. �- I ___·L__- to meet the cash requin:ments of the Be~:fo:cd-Pine Neit;hborhooc1 Develop;T1.2ni: Program Project in 1970. The non.,c ash contributions of $20 million are the eligible portion of total expenditures totaling about $29 million and have some of the following forms . School Sect i on 107 2 & Specia l Credits Streets Parks Water T.mp:r.ove1aent Sewer Improvement s Special Facilities Traffic I r,1p;:-ovemeats . Oth er $llol~ million 1.3 million l~. 7 m:i.llion .7 million . 6 million c6 m:i.lJ.:Lon .3 m:i.11:Lon .1 million million -~ $20.0 million Some of the problems encount ered because of t he use of non-cash contributions (9408% of total city funding) as the City's source of funding Urban Renewal activities are : 1. Butler Street A. Middle School with a total estim.'.lted co st of $2 million has been delaying the close of this proj ect , but should be under contract by August of 1969. 2o Ra-1vson - Washington A• . Neighborhood Fac ilities, Building with a total estimated cost of $1 million of which $150,0C0 will be an e ligibl e proj ect cost. This project is at present unfunded with -the only poss ible source of funds be i ng t~rough Mode l Citi es o It is presen t ly plenned f or the Ci t y to purchase the l and from t he Housing Authority and hold this until a det ermi na tion i s made _; 2r.rN1i rs rP.sulti.n ~ fro m th e construction of Publ ic Housing . �-I -· . L_ __ r egard irrg t h e t.1. se of :t-:ode J. CH :i. es f und s. B. P.s.rk 1-lith an es tiir.a t ed co s t 0£ $2L:0,000 of wh :i.ch $33,000 will b0 el igibl e cos ts . No s our c e of fu nding is pr e sently asce r tainabl e , A. El emen t a ry School 1-1ith an e st i ma t ed cost of $1.5 mj_llion a nd expected to be und er contract by Aui us t of 1969. B. An e:-::pansion of the cx:i.st ing el ernent 8. ry scho o1. with an e s ti- mated co s t of $700,000 and a t pre sent unf:un ded. c. Pa1·l~ with an e s tima t ed co s t of $75,000 which is al s o p:;:-es ently unftinded . 4, Th omasvi ll e A. El ement ary schoo l wi th $1.5 mill i on es timat ed co st and expect ed to b e under contract by Au gus t, 19 69. B. Pa rk with est i ma t ed cost of $126,00 0 which i s at pr esent unfunded. C. Tvn primar y scho ol EJ with $1 million es tina t ed total cost and a middl e school wi th an est i ma t ed co s t of $2 mi llion are unfunded and n o s our c e is s een until nt l eas t J ~~e of 1971. The a dvent of th e Neighb orho od Deve l opment Program has br ought t o a n end t he period during whi ch t he Ci ty could pl edge an i mprovemen t and t he n wai t unt il funding b ecame av.s.i l ab le b efore c ompl et i ng it. Und e r t he t erms of an NDP agreeme nt, the City must h ave co~nple t ed or have unde r cont ract al l non- ca sh grants - in- aid p l edged f or tha t pa r ticul ar yea r or contribut e the requ i r ed amoun t in c ash. - 3- �.. ,.... ' Our p:rc: :, cnt 1-mr p1~ojects We:re funded fo;~ 19 69 £r ora c11;:-eac1y existing imp:rnve·· ments o~ supporting facilities amounting to a tot a l City coDmi ttment of $10. 8 million. This supports a tot a l ·Nei ~hbo:choo<l Development Program of $32.l, million. The 1970 progr~~ is expected to hav e the follo wing Ci~y requirements: Non··Cash Ca sh $1. 7 milli on $ • 2 f\l:i.llion Bedfor<l-Pine 1.3 million 1.5 mi lli on Hocl e l CHie3 Edgei-lOOcl Vine City .1 milU.on .1 mill ion • 2 million . 2 million $3.l} million $1.9 mi J.lio~1 - ·-- --'"-- This would su pport a to tal pro gram o f $19.9 mi ll i on aud wou ld increase gr eat ly :i.f the Edge'i·wocl and Vine Cit y projects were expanded to a signi .. fic abt l eve l of activi ty. This means that to support th e fairly light l eveJ. of r:c tivi.ty projected fo,~ 1970 , th e City i·i:i.1.l need approxima teJ.y $1. 7 million . I£ any new m:eas are added or the l eve l of activity incr eased t his would increase from $2.5 to $4.0 million for 1970 . The possible sourc es of funds include: l. Gen::;ra l Funds ~ This s:i urce is already under consid er-ab l e pressu::ce and no relief is p resent ly anticipated. 2. The G. annually. o. Bonds already ap prov ed, fo r i ssue in the amo un t of $4 mi llion '. The financing of Neighborhood Development Programs f m m these bonds wou ld r equire the us e of almos t this entire amou~t every year and could very likely become erriliroifed in l egal tangle s . 3. Ano ther possibility is a sp ec ial Neighborhoo d Deve lopment Program General Obligation Bond Issue of $10 - $20 mil lion in 1970 with a nother issue 4 or 5 years lat er or the ob ta i ning of voter approva l to issue G. O. Bonds for th i s purpose i n the amount of $3-5 m:i.lJ.ion per year. [ • �. L. - This appr o 2ch is natu~elly sub ject t o .. T'df . ~.E!S of th e _p~b lic, and, there~ fo re , of u~cer tain dep enclabil i ty. L~. I I Ii. !' ' ' . Pe;:-haps the best method would be tln:ou::;h th e obtri:.i.ning of: a n ew rev-e nue sour c e , by state approval , such as a sales t ax or a payro ll tax of which a Cf,rtain portion ,-,oulc~ be eari;;art e d for Ne.:i.ghbo:chocrJ Dev_e lopment Programs . I • Of course in the pEr.suit of a ne-::-1 s ource of revenue we ,:n-e at loige:cheads !I ;, i' . with t he stet e and ma y not be able to obta in a satisfac t ory revenue s ource . I1 · Regardless of th e raetho <l you favor in obta i n ing the nee2c<l funds, it is .. i mperat i ve , if th e City of Atlanta is to 11'.aj_nte.in its progressive i mage and l 1· •' "•, r i to continue • ,_ C J_ LV thcrt a som~ce be found ; because the c ont i nuat ion of a signific ant program of r es tora tion and reheblitation of th e c entra l core of Atlanta is a vital cl ement in tl1 e continued evolution H Ii r: of our City. r: il ,I 1 ,.- I j ·1 I I -5- �AGENDA Meeting: Department of Housing & Urban Development Atlanta Planning Department Atlanta Housing Authority Atlanta Housing Code Division of the Department of Buildings Held: Committee Room frl 10:00-10:30 a.m., March 12, 1968 I. II. III. Jim Smith - Introduction of Mce~ing, Introduction of Speakers Collier Glc>.din - Import.wee of ~rvey , to City of Atlanta, Planning Dep.::rtm.ent, Housing Code Division. Responsibility of Planning Department and Housing Code Division, Introduction of Planning Department Contact Person (Neyers). HUD representatives - Importance of Survey to Housing Code Compliance Progre.m, to Workable Progran, to other Cities. .' .. ~ In attendance: J. S. Buchanan Tom Ficht Harold Taylor IV. Questions and Answers �AGENDA Meetine: Department of Housing & Urban Development Planning Department Atlanta Housing Authority Housing Code Division of the Dept. of Buildings Held: Office of Collier Glndin 10:30-11:00 a.m., March 12, 1968 Chairman: Helen l.feyers ~cussion Topics: 1. Evaluation of Atlanta survey techniques and procedures by Department of Housing & Urban Development and Atlanta Housing Authority. 2. Use of Atlanta's survey information by Department of Housing & Urban Development and by the City for Federal program planning. 3. Development and adoption of a uniform set of standards and .definitions for structural evaluation and rating. 4. Organizing a corr.mittee or other mechanism from the . Department of Housing & Urban Developm~ nt, Atlanta Housing Authority, Atlanta Planning Department, Housing Code Division to work on the above. �, / ATTENDANCE SHEET ! j Collier Gladin - Planning Dept. W. Buchanan - Dept. of Housing & Urban Development Tom Ficht - Dept. of Housing & Urban Development Harpld Taylor - Dept. of Housing &_Urban Development Wally Screws - Atlanta Housing Authority Jim Smith - Housing Code Division of the Dept. of Buildings George Aldridge - Planning Department John Watson - Planning Department Helen Meyers - Planning Department Jack Linville - Planning Department Wallace Edson - Housing Code Division Robert Tipton - HousiP~ Code Division 10 Housing Code Inspectors - Housing Code Division •.. �l\1EIG1-IBOR..1-IOOD D:'!:V:-.:LOP11ENT PROGR.!J :;: PI'OJ ECTS APRI L 29 , 1969 �The City of At l anta i s pres ent l y engage d in ei ght Ur ban Renewa l Pr ojec ts and five Neighbo r ho od Development Pro gram Projects (3 i n ex ecut ion , 2 in planrti ng onl y). Thes e pr oj ec ts a r e f unded jo int l y by t he Ci ty and t h e Fede:r:a l Governmen t. The fu nding a r r angement ca ll s for a contribution equal to one- th ird of the Ne t Proj ect co s t s from t h e City wi t h t h e remaining ti,10~t h i rds being s upplied by the Federa l Government . The Ci t y ' s share ma y be i n the f or m of cash cont r i butions or non- ca sh grants-in-aid , t hes e grant s -in- a i d ar e demol it io n and r emova l wor k , pr ojec t or s it e i mprovements , public and support ing f acil ities , and ot h e r s s uch a s c red i t s f rom cons truct ion of pub lic ho us i ngs . At pr ese nt, t he eight Ur ban Renewa l pro j ec t s presen tl y in execution are s unm1ar i zed a s follows: Net Pro j ec t Cos t s Loc a l Non-C a sh Gran ts - In-Aid Loca l Ca sh a nd Rea l Es t a te Cr edit s $60 millionl 20 million 1 million This poi nts ve ry emphat ic a lly to the f ac t t hat our pr es ent Urban Renewa l pr ogram has b een f inanced al most compl etel y through t h e us e of non- cash grant s-in- aid . The r e su lts of t h is pol i c y c an b e seen in tl~e long d elays enc ountered in th e c los ing out of these pr ojects, some of wh ich da t e back i nto the 1950 ' s ·. Th e cash used f or thes e pr oj ects has c ome from money set aside i n the 1957 a nd 1963 General Ob l igat ion Bond Issue s and to t aling $3.2 mil l i on o Th er efo r e, we have, at present , $2.1 million of unenc umbered f und s ava ilab l e f r om thi s s ource . Of th is amount, $1.7 is pre s ent l y expected to be needed lo£ thi s a,t1ount $4. 5 million or 7}{/4 has been incurred as interest charges o �·. ' - to mee t . tl ,e cash r equi rements of t he Bedfor d-Pine Nei ghbo r hood Development Program Proj ec t i n 1970 . The non- cash con t ributions of $20 mi l lion a re the e l igibl e portion of to tal expenditures tota ling ab out $2 9 million and have some of the fol lowing fo rms . Schoo l Sec tion 1072 & Special Credi ts Stre et s Parks Wa t er I mpr ovement Sewer I mpr ovemen:: s Spec i al Fac i l it i es Tra ff:i. c I m:_Jl'."ovements . Other $11o4 million 1. 3 mi ll ion ~.• 7 mi ll i on • 7 mi ll i on .6 million 06 mill i on .3 mi ll i on .1 million o3 mi llion $20 . 0 million Some o f th e prob l ems encountered becaus e of th e us e of non-ca sh cont ributions ( 9li. o8% of total city f unding) as t he City ' s s our ce of funding Ur ba n Renewal activiti e s ar e: 1. But l er St ree t A. Middle School with a to tal e s timated co st of $2 milli on has been delaying th e c l ose of this pro j ect, but should be under contrac t by August of 1969. 2o Rawson - Washington A. Ne ighbor hood Fa c ilitie s, Build ing with a total es t i ma ted co st of $1 million of wh ich $150, 000 will be a n eligible pr oj ect c ost. This pr oj ect i s at pr esent unfunded with the only pos sib l e s ource of f unds being through Model Ci ties o It is presently planned for the City t o purchase the l and f r om th e Housing Au thor ity a nd hold this unt il a dete rmi nation is made �·• J - r egarding the use of Mode l Ci t ies funds. B. Park with an estimated co st of $240,000 of which $33,000 will be eligible costs . No source of funding is presently ascertainable . 3. Rockdale A. Elementar y School with an estimated cost of $1.5 million and expec ~ed to be under contra ct by August of 1969. B. An expansion o f the existing ele1 entary school with BL esti- mated c ost of $700 ,000 and at present unfunded . C. Par k 1·1 ith an estimc1ted cost of $75,000 which is also pre sent l y unfunded. ~.. Thomasvil le A. Elementary school with $LS million estimated cost and exp ected to b e under contract by August , 1969 . B. Park with estimated cos t of $126,000 which is at p res ent unfunded. C. Tw:> prima ry schoola with $1 million estimated total cost and a middle school with an estimated cost of $2 mi llion are unfunded and no source is seen until &t least J une of 1971. The advent of the Neighborhood Development Program has brought to an end the period during which the City could pledge an improvement and then wait until funding became ava ilable before completing it. Under the terms of an NDP agreemen t , the Ci t y mus t have comple ted or have und er contrac t all non-cash grants-in-aid pl edged f or t h at part i c ular year or contribute t he required amount i n cash . - 3- �-I_ I ' Our present NDP pr oj ec ts we:;_·e funded for 1969 fr om already ex isting i mprove~ ments or suppor ting facilities amoun ting to a tota l City coP-anittment of $10 .8 million. This supports a t ota l l·~eighborhood Development Program of $32.fi. million. The 1970 program is expected to have the following City requirements : Non~Cash Cash Bedfo1·d-Pine $ • 2 million $1. 7 mil lion 1.5 millinn 1.3 million Hodel Cities • l mi ll1.c11 . 2 mi llion Edgewood • 2 million . 1 mil ?. ion Vine City $3.Lf mi ll lou $1.9 mill ion Thi s would support a total program of $1909 mi l lion and would i ncrease great ly if the Edgewood and Vine Cit y proj ect s were expanded to a significant level of activi t y. This means that to support th e fair ly light level of activity projected f.o r 1970, the City wj_ll need approxi mately $1. 7 million . I f any new areas are added or the level of activity increased this woul d increase f rom $2 •.S to $4. 0 mi llion for 19 700 The possible s ources of fund s include: 1. General Funds - This ro urce is already under considerab l e pressure and no relief is presently anticipat ed . 2. The G. annually . o. Bonds already approved, f or issue in the amount of $4 mi llion ' The fi nanc ing of Neighborhood Development Pro6rams from these bonds would require t he us e of almost this entire amoutit every year and could ver y likely be come embroited in l egal tangles. 3. Another possibility is a spec ial Neighborhood Development Program General Obligation Bond Issue of $10 - $20 million in 1970 with another issue 4 or 5 years lat er or the obtaining of voter approval to issue G. O. Bonds for this purpose in the amount of $3-5 million per year. �' .I This approach is n atura l ly s ubject to t:..he ut :Lrns of th e public, and, t herefo re , of unce rtain dependab ility . 4. PerLaps the be st metlod would be th r ough the obtaining of a n eH revenue s ource, by s tate approva l, such as a s ales tax or a payr oll tax of which a c ertain portion wou ld be earma:i::-ked for Neighborhoo:1 Deve lopmen t Progr e....rns . Of cours e in the pursuit of a new sourc e of r ev enue we are a t lo ggerh eads with the sta ~ and may not be able to obta in a s at isfacto ry revenue source . Regard le s s of the method you f avor in ob t aini ng the needed funds , it is i mperat i ve, if the City of At lanta is to ma inta in its progre ssive i mage and t o c ont i nu e its drama t ic deve l opment , that a source be found ; bec au s e the cont i nuat ion of a signific ant program of restoration and rehabl i ta tion of t he c entral co r e of Atlanta i s a v ital element in t he continu ed evo l utio n o f our Cityo - 5- �COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION IN PLANNING OF MODEL NEIGHBORHOOD PROGRAM City Planning Department City Hall Atlanta, Ga. January, 1968 OUTLIN"E .INTRODUCTION IMPORTANCE OF ORGANIZATION PROCEDURES FOR PLANNING PROBLEM ANALYSIS, GOAIB & PROGRA..M STRATEGY STATEMENT - GUIDE TO COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION IN PLANNI NG (1) Discussion Reports (2) Distributien of Rep0rts ATTACHMENTS Discussion Reports Chart Report #1 - Problem .Analysis, Sample Outline �IMPORTANCE OF ORGANIZATION If the planning of the Model Neighborhood Program is to be successful, it is absolutely essential that all key participants ·i.ir the program are well organized. This means that the following organi zational matters should be accomplished before planning begins. 1. The Model Neighborhood Executive Boa rd should be formed to act as the ultimate authori ty of the pr@gram. It should allow representation from all levels of gover-JLment - city, county, state, and federal; residents of the Model Nei ghborhood area; and residents of the city-at-large. 2. The Model Neighborhood staff should be f ormed, including the executive director, the three chief planners and the technical staff. 3. Stable local organizations which adequ at el y represent the residents of the various neighborhoods in the area should be in operation. While those organizations should be representative of the interests of all residents and give everyone a voice in their affairs, they should not be se cumbersome that they cannot work effectively with the planners. In other words, it will be physica.JJ..v impossible for the planners to carry all of their work directly to the 'grass roots' organizations of the area. This may be necessary for some key issues, but for the most part planners will have to work with a small committee of 10-20 persons if they are to accomplish anything worthwhile. �COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION IN PLANNING OF MODEL NEIGHBORHOOD PROGRAM INTRODUCTION The Model Neighborhood Program offers an excellent opportunity to bring about basic improvements in one of the most problematic areas of Atlanta. The area selected for the pr0gram contains all the varied and complicated forms of urban blight which plague American cities today, from overcrowded, su~standard housing to incompatible land use mj_xtures to poer street conditions and inadequate community facilities to all facets of socio-economic poverty and deprivation. Most of these conditions have deep roots and are so complex and of such a nature that it will take nothing less than a special concentrated long-term effort to eliminate them. So far no major city in the country has been successful in eliminating them. The Model Neighborhood Program can bring about t he special concentrated effort which is needed to alleviate the conditions of the ' Model Neighborhood' area. It is designed to pool the resources of the city, county, state, and federal governments along with tho se of private interest groups to make a total attack on the serious and widespread problems of the area for a period of several years. The funds it provides will support the pr gram through the planning and implementation stages. However, if the Model Neighborhood Program is to avoid the mistakes of many previous efforts to help slwn residents it is very important that the pr gram be carefully planned and that local residents be involved throughout all stages of planning. The purpose of this report is to show how c mmunity par ticipation ean be effectively fitted into the planning f the M del Nei~hborho0d Pr gram. -2- �Hence the neighborhood groups of the area should be capable of fer.ming such a cemmittee which can wor k with the planners and relay this work to the 'grass ro0ts' groups . It has been suggested that the steering committee of the various neighb0rhood gr oups in the area serve this function . PROCEDURES FOR PLANNING The federal government has set the pr ocedure s for the planning of the Model NeighborhQod Program. The period allowed f or planning is one year, beginning with the date of the congressional announcement of the program (Nov. 15, 1967 - Nov• . 15, 1968). During t his period t he foll0wing planning items have to be submitted to the fe de ral government for approval: 1. Problem Analysis, Goals & Progra~ Strategy Statement 2. Five -Year Pl an 3. Firs t-Year Action Progr am 4. Pl anning and Evaluation Progr am S. Statement of Administ rative St ructLITe for Impl ement ation Of t hese planning submission requirements , the firs t one - the Problem Analysis, Goals and Program St rategy'Statemeht - i s probably the most important, as it will set the stage for the rest of the planning effort. It will establish the general orientation of the Five-Year Plan and the FirstYear Action Program and will initiate the general procedures for community participation in planning. Thus, it can serve as a guide as to how the local residents will be involved in plam1ing. -3- �PROBLEM ANALYSIS, GOALS AND PROGRAM STRATEGY STAT~j§JIT-GUIDE TO COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION IN PLANNING The preparation of the Problem Analysis, Goals and Program Strategy is divided into three stages or milestones: Strategy. Problem Analysis; Goals; and It is intended that the Model Neighborhood planning staff and the community will be working cl0sely toget her in this preparation so that the best of their ideas will go into the f inal statement submitted to HUD. (1) DISCUSSION REPORTS The basis 0f the working relationship between the Model Neighborhood planning st aff and community will cent er ar oLU1d discussion repor ts to cover each milestone: Problems; Goals; and Strategy. These reports will be done by the planning staff and designed to st imulate discussion among t he r esi dents . They will not be the f inal word on anything, but merely present t he information available to the pl anning st aff so as to initi ate community involvement and discussion on t he significant pl anni ng is sues. The community will be able to criticize , add to and/or subtract from the reports . F0r exampl e , t he f irst r epor t will cover the subject: Problem Analysis and attempt to identify and survey the major condi t ions and problems of the Model Neighborhood area which ju st ify treatment. a. It will: define and document the major conditi0ns And problems as far as available data will allow and according to f ollowing categories: employment; housing ; schools; recreation ; land use; health services; family, legal services; police protection.; ,and 'ether. -4- �b. preseBt the i..nforrnati0n in a simple and concise manner so th2t lay citizens will have a minimum amount of tr<:mble in reading it. c. provide a brief questionnaire on which residents can rate the priority of problems in their community according to the above categories in (a). d. provide space in which residents caD criticize the contents of the report, i.e., redefine problems, r eorganize data, contribute additional ideas, etc. (2) DISTRIBUTION OF REPORTS The reports are to be distributed to each of the six communicities in the Model Neighborhood area. They will include infonnation on the area as a whole and on the particular community to which it is distributed. It probably will not be feasible to get written responses from all residents ef the area. But perhaps certain people frem each community could be responsible for surveying the responses of the residents, summarizing them, and writing them down to be ret urned to the planning staff. The reports will be all wed to circulate for a maximum period of two weeks. This should give enough time for r esidents to gather up their written responses te the report. Also during this time it would be desirable to have a general meeting in each community, whe r e residents can _freely express their own ideas ab0ut the subj ect matter of the report. After this circulation period which hopefully will br ing about fruitful dialogue and exchanges between the planners and the cormnunity, the planning staff should then be in a position to draw up final reports on Pr blems, Goals and St rategy which fully incorporate the ideas of �the residents. These reports would then make up the final Problem Analysis, Goals, and Pregram Strategy Sta tement . ATTACHMENTS Attached to this report are: 1. a chart which shows how the deadline dates and circulation periods of the discussion reports fit int0 the work program for the Problem Analysis, Geals, and Progr am Strategy Statement . 2. a sample outline of Rep0rt #1, Probl em Analysis. - 6 - �DISCUSSION REPORTS CHART PLANNING ACTIVITY Milestone Work Tasks Jan . Feb. Mar . Apr. May l 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 - 1) Problem Analysis Goals and Strategy Swnmary ef Tasks l) Citizen or i entation 2) Problem Analysis 3) Goals Development 4) Strate gy 5) Pr eparation of Report A) Preblem Analysis Report #1 1) Assemble Availabl e Data 2) Decision on Additional Data Requi red 3) Gather Additional Data Required 4) Citizen Analysis of Problems 5) Summarize and .Anal yze 6) Pr epare Report Legend Deadline for distributing reports to community .A Circulation period - - - - Deadline for collection reports from community -y - ·- .--I- - - �Jan. Miltest0ne Werk Tasks Feb . Mar. Apr. Summary of Tasks ' B) Goals Report #2 1) Decument Exi sting Goal s 2) Citizen Goals Set ting 3) Synthesis and Repor t Pr eparation C) Str ategy Report #3 1) Devel 0p Program Approach 2) Establish Program Pr i ority 3) I denti fy Cr itical Changes Requir ed 4) Report Preparation I May 1234 1234 1234 1234 1234 •--, - L.. ---. -- �REPORT #1 - PROBLEM ANALYSIS SAMPLE OUTLINE I. II. Introduction A. Pu~pose of report - to identify and document major conditiens · and problems of area B. Brief description of Model Neighborhood Area and its six communities Problems of Model Neighborhood Area as a Whole 1. 2. 3. 4. s. I II. 6. Health services 1. Family, legal services Housing Employment Schools Recreation Land Use 8. 9. Police protection and c0mmunity relations Other Problems Which Are Especially Acute In Parti cular C0mmunity (e.g. Grant Park) While Grant Park contains all of the proble s affecting the Model Neighborhood areas as a whole, it is especiall~r har dpressed with the following pr oblems. 1. 2. IV. Employment Family, legal services Questionnaire: How Do You Rate Your Community? Schools ___god ___fair ___poor v. Housing Etc. ---good --- fair ---poor Comments 1. Do you think this report adequat ely covered the main problems f your neighborhood? 2. What problems do you find not mentioned in the report? � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 2, Folder 1, Complete Folder Box 2 Box 2 Folder 1 Folder topic: Planning department | 1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/d583c3212cb0595cc037d7e8aef89ff5.pdf 48c07fde3b4faf267b707a9ef5e1a2f4 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. I. CITY OF ATLANTA DEPARnIENT OF LAW 2614 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUI LDI NG ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 Janu ayy 27 , 1969 . -· --- -· Mr. Pa.ul B. Ivay Land Ar.,ent C:tty Hall ·· ---Atlnnt<1, -G~o:::-gla 30303 Dear Paul: 1 Re: et al Cou:-c t ·- ----'11112: Spoc5.al H.:1stcr, P.·(!; -:- C. C['_rn.e:,· l:~2~cl tb2 c1bove.-· style.:1 c ase on , ::i-r>.-, ~-·...,..-, ..·· "-~::i,. .. ·r_ u, '-"' ": -n l .r..r•• 1 -:-i""Y ?7 19'0e:9 o-r= J ...,...,.t.1·1""··y 23 1 1rir..9 ';,/ -,;.,z."'"" •-· ··. ··,;-,crnd _w ~- .. '-.. ...,. $35.500.00 to H~cs. Cl2.z-:. ·u,:i oi $3,COO.OQ to F-.nyr::onil C. Ballard P the ___.., th - t- ::-:-i.~ 1.. ' ". c:.y, r::n:dng a tot..:i.1 nmount of j. c-.L..:. \. ~ "J , L . .,__ _,. i,.._,,J,-•..... _ ) , .l.. $38,500.00. apnrni g;-,·,. J testified th-3.t in h:1.s ODin" 11::! leased fee was $36,800.00 nna th9 value --~- ~,. , 200. 00, in th,~ total ~~ount of $33,000.00. L - - -- - tenant Tt,:ill"'·"'d .,.."' ,~-:..,...Le·"u b·i~·,-= 0- 1-r... , "-~.,., cM u.J.~ , J..~!_}... J.'-"u-!..il.o __ u ""-.,j _ the vc,.lue of the le as ehold was $1l~,oco.oo. Pi"1---~ .1.11_ .1 1 1 .. • 0 ~ and in his O?inion Mr. Cl;:i.J'.':~ r;;;p~e::;cntscl Hrs. Clzi::c1c, and in his op:1.11:lc,:1 tha valm of th-~ lc.nd anJ buildii.1.g w~s $60,000.00 n et to Nrs. Cl~~·k nftGr thB payr::~nt of income tmcrn. �Mx:. Paul , n. Iv~Y Je.:rn1t11:y {27, 1969 Pcige 2 , I . it -~ . . At the hear.::_n3, 11r. Clark attemptecJ to :i.1:.trocluco ~ le:1.sa e n tered into on S0.ptember 18, 1968, b et-:,;,:i~n Hrs. Cln:1:k anc1 E,:. Ba 11n r<l · ,.~ ·i-,..,-:, i·r • B!'.111[!~-'cl fm.· ft .,..CiJt:81 of• ,.·r·dc'b -._ . 11"!\f'<Je:::1 __ ...,. ,,. ._, ._ t·ly• - on,· \;;,,;;,----- bu·11d1,1:·r - - ---o to 1.-•_.. ...__ .. _ 11 ~ !•. unf'lv0 00 ., ·vc,~,.,. ";,-i..., J -~a ,:•:' ) CO" v~::. ~ .. ," rl i·,11r.:i il-,~i · , · ,1 o-r i·:,)~·" ·""l~-,~,~ 1 J •( , , • ..:1, .._,.->..,.. L ... - .. 1969, to Oct ob~r. 3J.i) 1972. On obj 0 c t:i on , t h'.3 le ass u2s e:~cluclccl -fro:;:J co::.!r;;icfo·.,_·.::J.tio:-! b2.::rti.1sc rr..s.t1~ aft.9:-c both p m:ti98 h3d notice of ~ a .f 0 f .- ,.;J ,.....,. _.._. - - ·- ·- V ·- , .. _ _ _.._ _::.. "' .l. , · - - V...._•'----' ~.l.. -• - I ii I -..1 · th,3 ··co-r-1.d,:;r:na.tion suit. '1.'he a rr:ount a u2.r.cfa<l by th0 Sp~cL2l 1-1::ioto~ to !·!rs • . Cln::-1( fo:: hm: leased fee inte~·20 t of $35,500.00 is l ess tha-.:.1. tl:.e appi:zdsal of. Mr. Dn.b:1:;y of $37,750.00 und tha.t o:2 }!::·. Xb·:\:J.£m:J in tl:,rl ~r.:ount - .---- -- -of- .$36 ,eoo. 00. l!CCo'i:-d:i.n:_:;1.y, . I -;rnv.J.ci not recm;-:~::~nd · cm app~al frqn .•·. Tha nnount of $3 _,00 0. CO mrn:rcacr to th~ lc:,os·se ir, o-v·:::~· lGZ ~:)ova 117:. Dnb11ey's a?p;:aisnl o f $1,850.00 2nd ?5.-r . Ki~klar.il's a r,p:; . ;_isa . l of $1,200.00. ucuJ.cl point out tho. t Hr . E~116:r<l h rcts ar,p2.:rently • 1 ~ld"'.,." 7 O,_,,-,, c,o-;-•-:> f·•;--r,n • i•3.• rn ~r, j C-j .=,..3 t~,;:, ,'- 1t',r->_ 0'•...'"'1"• ~u _,..,b - •- .:., .u_; wJ .I:"' - Or.l. Q ~ir.--,••. r--.,_u..,. c. •• ri u ..... 1., ,_,.;, L--.1.--U .... .,1,.. J natt2<l $2~000.00 fro~ hi s bu3inass l~st year because of th~ £~ct that h~ u.J.s in th~ hospi tal so nuc11. In adc1iti-:rn.i h:! has to w.J.lk vith ::13sist2.nce. I f-2el sura that h:tn phy.sical c o11dit:J.o:i ,;-~ould · influe nce n jur1 in. th 2. ev2nt hls . ll.i;;..s.rd is &p-;:,;::al,~d t o a j u .r :y . r _,1. "!> ..., ... . ) -I-- , tli_,';Lt'Co...., ,~1 ~ -..,.-r·il"i <'l" b :-iz".,1 t:hP len <i~~Q .._J..e?. ciTIO t-~, -:-. , '-' ", '-'.~,1;0 j d ; ,,t-~3:e~ Jr,,__ __ io, th~ totn.1 a::Dun.ts irNolv.2 d , ?-Ir. Dab..1·2!y' s app!'.ais2.l wi~ $39,600.00 .!:r..cl F t· . Kirl·: lnnd's a.pp1·a:t.sal was $38,000.00 . ?ro -- total · su:;i. o.i7ardod by t h3 Hasti::T of $38;500.00 is w.211 w:1.t'hin tp2 ~-r2nze of the City's 2~prcdsal. ~ .:.--'"".._.. _. _ .. .::J - - - - - - --- '-"'- - - .. - • __ lhith.~r K-c. BallarcJ nor Hrs. Cla:rk ·we:ce rep:ees~nt,?.d by c.01.rnccl at Jr- r.:.:1y 1-:.~11 b3 th-: 1t T:-Ira. c1_nri.,;: will cP)D23. l to a. t h ·-=- h,.,.n·..-·t~:1° jury in:1souch as t~~3 c :i:~'.1-nt c :1ardo d to thsJl by th2 S;i.:ci:;t1 ?-::1 ste~ _.._ -- - -.. ~• L,,, "-,;; - a.L j .i �"· . -· ... Hl'.', Paul I B, Iv0y J anum.-y 2 7 ti l9G9 Pa,0'.'.·e 3 was .some $2;000.00 less than that As · to the a-.- n· · ti~)oJ:>a1 4'.;. f:tlir!g en n·s to ·the J,, - _ .. 0 -:= -r-,~ ·(" -~ d - - ' - ' - - c,:. to th2m by tb.i3 s;;,::a:;:d · to E1.·. BallarcJ, I · uou 1c1 z-ccorr:::.:·:;i.'i.d no appt~t.1.. l ,::uless f:tlcd by· H:rs. C1.e.rk. In th-2 . c v 2r1t of 11r.s. Cl~:d-:. , :-'D D app0al, then I '\·70n1d recou:-;-:,.e~l d that c1:a E.p;_x ~al be fllecl a\1~-rJ of Ht. Ballo.:.:d. , _. ', Please let ma kno:1 yon:r w:1.chcs in th:1.s rr.3. t t a r.. . Fe:n:in Y. Assist.::.nt City Attorney Y-il.1/ljl cc: Nr • .Sta.n I·far tin. . \ � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document : CITY OF ATLANTA DEPARTMENT OF LAW 2614 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 January 27, 1969 Mz, Paul B. Ivey. = Lend Agent Cit cy ia a1 ~ALLDESs - Georgia 30303 Dear Paul: Re: City of Atlanta v. Case No, B-42835, (Parcel 3 Qazs Senasty 25, 1969, and xh: heard the above-styled case on Jiacd on Jeonuary 27, 1969, o $35,509.00 ta Mrs. Clazxi sum o£ $3,000.09 to Raymond c. Ballard, the ty = tis Ssscoricty, making a total amount of $33,500. 00. We. T Tnase Ke <, testified that in his opin- fon the marks ae was $36,809.00 and the value of the leassh: ie total amount of $33,000.00. The tenant, Mr. Ballard, repre the value of the leasehold was ~~ eet 3 Ff Mr. Clark raprasontsd Mes. Clark, and in his opinion the valw of the land and building wes $60,000.00 net to Mrs, Clack after tha payment of income taxes. My. Paul B. Ivoy yok | January 27, 1969 | es . : | ' | Page 2 At the hearin Se fe, Clark attempted to introduce a lease entered into on September 18, 1968, batwaon Mrs. Clavk and Mx, Ballard $ nes lease dj che entire building to Mr. Ballard fox a rental of $4,600.00 a year, This loase covated the term of November 1, ' Sipie to Octabar 31, 1972. On objection, the lease was exclud D $ Seon compidaration beaause mada after both parties lee “the ‘condemmation But, The amount averded by the Spacial Master to Mrs, Clark for her ieasead fee enterest of $35,500.00 is less than the ar ppraisal of Me, Dabney of $57,759. 00 and that of Me, Kiekland in the amount --—-- 0£- $36,809. 00,” Accordingly, I vould not recomend’ an appeal from tho avard to the OWRes. 2 104 abova The andunt of $3,000,090 ava xded to tho leosse is ovez He. Dabney's appzaisal of $1,850.00 and ie, Kirklard's anpraisal of $1,260.00. 2 would point out thet Me. Ballard has asparently ‘undargone some type of operation, and testified that he only 34 cake xd $2,009.00 from his business last year because of the fact that he wes in the hospital so much. In addition, he has to walk with assistance, I feel sure that his physical condition would inflivence a jury in the event his avard is appealed to a jury. Considering both the leased fee and the leas: -is, the tot21 exounts involvad, Mr. Dabney's appzra $39,600.00 and thr, Kirkland’s appvaisal was $38,00 Dy .00,. Tro -$atal--son teardse by the Master of $33,500.60 is well within the a “yenge of the City's appraisal. on as * ! Neither Me. Ballard nor Mrs. Clark were represanted by counsel at tha hearing. It may well be that Mra. Clark will anpeal to a jury inasmich as the amount evarded to then by the Special Master Mr. ou BR. Ivey January’ 27, 1969 Paze 3 Was |S some $2,000. 00 le ss than that offered to then ie the City. oe to the avazd to Mr. sitar I would ‘$ecoeea no appeal watess an aposal was filed by Mrs. cain in the event of Mys. Clark Filing an appeal, then I would recoumend that an appeal be file d ; > as to the avard of Me. Bailard, Please let ma know your wishes in this mat “a SP cr e . Yours very teuly, Forcin Y. Mathers Assistant City Attorne ¥ Fyu/1 jl ec: Mr. Stan Martin  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 1, Folder 22, Document 32 Box 1 Box 1 Folder 22 Folder topic: Parks department | 1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/39e7b39e8444a0a7db6e9926a7516a39.pdf b460a4f1bd0b31c4e49aa439939cb779 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. CITY OF AT LANT A DEPARnIENT OF LAW 2614 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 January 27-; 1969 / Mr. P-1ul B •. Ivs2y Land Agent C:tty HnJ.1 Atlant~,_G2orgia · :Re: 30303 D2vis, et al City of Atl:.1nto. C-:lc':',"l l·1o B c, {'.,?0°2r(;;;..a. l t , J - I • ,.,..__ ~, ,j ....,, ·:·,ur··.~ , _ ._.. • (', ."" CottTI· ~·-Ji ·o . ,c iv•·i - - - 0 './J. -·- • Q~s.:.~!_l:- .::..1'.ti-:.~~ig~l~-- .~:-~:::.:::.:._9..t.S.!.)_ _- ·- ·- ~The abov8-~tylc<l case Carn'..}y-; on Jrmuary 23, _·,59, e.nc1 Janua'.'!:.-y 27, 1969, of. $G l. l-tns t0.r, En~h C. entcn.·cd an m-m:rd on ,::) t ,.,. J. ~c t estified thnt in his T,J•aq ~0,- 1 00" 00 ,.~ .• , ,_. \.V• • 1.i.!.. • oninio·n the raz.~ket valne of p -:•o n --:)•_.,___,, ..i.. l.J-L.t.)' . ~J -, Inasmuch as ti ·:., M:iste a:-1ard 1.1as tho same nn tha t te stified to by th,3 City's n;,. :--·~~_,n'" ~T , .:i.nd ina.sIJuch us an offe r u a s macfa to the owner of $61,.750.00, · I would recoil11:ancl n-::, a;_)pesl in this case. Please aclvise me if you should de Bire an appeal. · With k:i..n(hst pe:rso i1:J.l r c3ards. Yours_v~ry truly, FYM/ 1jl cc: Hz-. Stan H:J'!:'tin Fer.ci.11 Y. Natr.~1.;s Assistant City Attor113y � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document CITY OF ATLANTA DEPARTMENT OF LAW 2614 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 : Ae January 27, 1969 Mr. Poul B. Ivey Land Agangé — City Hail Atlenta, Georgia 30303 Daar Peuls: ‘Re: City of Atlan Davis, et al Case No. Bet ef v psperior eee (Parcel. ae. Mis meee) clal Master, Hugh C. entered an avard on that in his = 4 cs »00 0.00. bie. Sead. and in his opinion the market value of CO. paves peor waneees is the property avard was tha same as that testified to by t tha > chty"s ass a » and inasmuch as an offer was made to the owner of $61,750.00, ¥ would recommend no appeal in this case, Please advise m2 if you should dasire an appeal. tf With kindest personal ragards. YouEs. very truly, Ferrin Y, Mathaws ; FYM/1j1 Assistant City Attornsy  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 1, Folder 22, Document 31 Box 1 Box 1 Folder 22 Folder topic: Parks department | 1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/f5f675870aff18ee7f0315e3610887d3.pdf 1506fd83fee9e4fb6dc5c379e6d41fd0 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. T~e follo~'7 j_)1 g ar e 2s i·re r e serv e d. b;f the Food Sup~)len:ent Progrc1rn 1 dur ing its s econd week of oper~ti on . ARSA NUl·TI:3SR OF PAH'l'ICIPANTS -TOTAL --~- - - -·- - - -- - - Served by Car ey El?2!~en t ar y Scho ol Horne Pc1 r k sso Te chwooct · Cent 2. r 640 Centra l City Rec r 3a t i on Cent~r 61.iO Kni ght Cent er 780 ½ary George Avenue 1000 Perry Boulev a r d 1000 Arche r Hi gh Scho ol 2000 Chattahooc h~e Schoo l 200 0 Engl i sh Avenue Sc ho ol Schoo l Tot a 1 Served by Ce nt er ~ill School Ander son Pa r k 1000 "' Arlingt on Circle 1000 850 G~m Cl u'o Pe1 rk 1000 Wes t Fulton Schoo l 375 Ce nter Hill Rec r e ., t i,Yor1 Cent er 1000 l·faddox Park School .TotRl 47 5 5700 Se rved by Coan 1-ti.dd l c Schoo l Wa l ke r PRrk 650 We sley Play l ot 900 Bas i RecreR tion Center 650 900 ·o �6So Gi lli 2m P2 r k Grctnt Pc1 rk 1000 /- 1 Coan Midd l e S6iool 750 C. D. Hube rt School 750 Ba ss High Schoo l 40:) Sch oo l '.i'ota l t-6)0 Se rved by C. F . Harpe r EJ?- r:ient a ry Schoo l Joy l an:l P.: i r k 1000 Pl unkc t totm Cente r 550 Co ope r Stree t Eb mentary 750 Gil be r t Sc'.1001 soo Har pe r SchooJ. Scho o l To t a l Se r .red b y :-Ic r ndcm ~l sme nt.:::1ry Scho o'.l. Vine Ci ty 1000 Magnolia and Mao l e St r 2ets 575 'I'hur ri.ond. Street Playlot 600 Nor t hs i de Drive 600 Ashby Circ l e 1200 Strong 2nd Kennedy ~treets 500 Soo P l ay l ot - :Rhode s a nd l'oste ll Stree t s Schoo l Tota l (l Served b ;r c~ 49?5 'l. Slenenta r y Sch oo l 1 3edford-Pi ne Center 1310 Wylie an'i Tye Street Playlot 760 Play lot - 618 Irwin Stree t 350 Butl er Ce nt er 1Li60 0 0 �r i I B'orrest and Fort Stree t 800 r Parkwoy C~ nte n 6)0 Angier and Pa.rkw~:y Playlot 600 Boulevard and Aucurn Ave nue 300 i-Ianover and Re nfroe 500 Sampson nnd East Streat 630 0 J:!urp>iy Hig'.1 School SchooJ. -Tota l Se rved by ~Iur.~D:1 ries Schoo l Brown Avenue and J ones joro Road · Park A'renu.e cJncl Lc1 nsin ~ · Hice Her.1ori;1l 670 Ad.?.i r PciTk 500 Pittman Park 1~50 Bethlehem Center Schoo·J. Tota 1 Served by- A . I\. . J ones E_lementc1ry Sc:1001 Howell Pa rk 500 500 Norcross Play lot , 500 . / .Ha;rne s Playlot 500 Oa kla nd City Playlot 670 Cr.?.ddock School School Tota l 200 ~--·· 2u70 Serve-1 b;,, Pey ton _Forres t Ele1r.ent-:1ry School Adamsville Park 500 Phylot - 2185 1.Terben.?. Str2- et 0 1600 0 �r · I TOTA L l\iUI'-tJ~R OF P :\ ::.TIC IPA?•:TS Wilson Avenue 700 Tremont Dr ive 900 Collier Pa rks 1100 English Park 500 JOO Wilson Eills Pa rk Schoo]. Tot2l 5600 Served by Pr::or Stree t School Cn.pi tol .Avenue Pl ay lot 1500 ~d Cook Recreation Center 1500 T:.fes l ey '.:-louse 800 ·. Ira Re cre ation 1500 Pry or Street School 3000 1 fashington-Rycle r 1000 Dodd PJ.a;y-lot 1000 Playlot - 71 Little Stree t 10()0 Playlot - 941 McDanie l Stre et 600 Pla'-rlot - Ge or co-1. n a nd YcD::ini e l St r se t 650 Play l ot - A tla n-La Sta dilun Pa rkin g Lot 750 .; 0 Playlot - Nary and _Colei-na n Street School Tota l 600 12°, !ioc5 0 0 Se rv e d by D. H. Stan t on Schoo l - r!;i.ygood and Cre :.-1 S~r e e t Pl a.ylot 900 Danie l St~nton Pa r k 900 1000 Ri cha r ds on St r ee t Ce nt e r 650 Conna lly Street Cente r E . P . Jo'(l.n son Sch oo l Tot a l �PR09L~MS E~COUNTlR~D 1. Inadequate propara tj_on of food. 2. The t rucks stil l have not been p1·ovided with a c aae in . I b orde r t o hold food in place. 3. Schools were not provi ded wiU1 enou~h i ce . 4. ·. The s anduiches were t oo -:3.ry bec ause t here was p l ain peanut ' bu tt~r . In ac!.diticn , h : t r o.ve J. i ng to var:i.ou.s schoo l s , I f ound th':lt bro,-mies ,,1ere bein g made with pe a nut butter and wsre not co.::1pJ.etely cooked. 5. I be l ieve fo e !1eals offere d could be more substs.nti.al if c ertciin ot:1 er commodit i es were prep :->r-:id. For exarnpJ.e , tr1e rne~ls would b e much b e tte r i.f merlts were added to the sup -plements . / 0 �I. TOT AL NUI-m~:- OF P/\. nTICIP/ ,NTS - ---- - ·-------1 Served by 1.<ldter \V'.1ite School 'tl?. lter rllh.ite School 2000 Art Abner Place 700 A. D. Willi;uns School 'fotci l 1000 3700 This week's tot a l r epres ents an increase of 22,L75 over the previous week . / •• Q � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document Tne following areas were served by the Food Supplement Program during its second week of operation, ‘> =o 8 *o TOTAL NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS Served bv Carey Elementary School Home Park 550 Techwood Center é,0 Central City Recreation Center 6,0 - Knight Center 760 Mary George Avenue | 10009 | Ferry Boulevard 1000 Archer High School 2000 Chattanoochze School 2000 English Avenue School _ 3905 School Total 12,505 Served by Center 4ill School Anderson Park "1000 Arlington Circle } | 1000 Grove Park 650 Gun Club Park | 7 1000 West Fulton School , 275 Center Hill Recrertion Center 1000 oh Maddox Park 75 School Total 700 Served by Coan Middle School Walker Park | 650 Wesley Playlot | , . 900 Bass Recreation Center F : 650 Brannai 900 page 2 ARSA, - TOTAL NUMSSR OF PARTICTPANTS Gilliam Park — 650 Grant Park = | 1000 Coan Middle Sciool 750 C.-D. Hubert School 750 Bass High School hoo School Total G650 fered by C, F. Harper Slamentary School 5 Joyland Park 1009 Pinte toun Center 550 Cooper Street Blementary 750 Gilbert School 500 Benger School 400 ; School Total 3200 Served by Herndon Slementary School Vine City 1000 Magnolia and Maple Streets 575 Thurmond Street Playlot 600 Northside Drive | ; 600 Ashby Cirele 1200 Strong and Kennedy Streets 500 z Playlot - Hhodes and Postell Streets ai 4 500 School ‘Total LOTS peeves: tp Cs; W. Blementary Sehoot Bedford-Pine Center 1310 Wylie and Tye Street Playlot 760 Play lot - 618 Irwin Street 350 Butler Center 160 paze 3 AREA: TOTAL NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS Forrest and Fort Street _ Parkway Center, ! Angier and Parkway Playlot Boulevard and Auturn Avenue Hanover and Renfroe Samoson aa Bast Street Murpay High School School: Total Served by Humparies School Brown Avenue and Jonessoro Road Park Avenue and Lansing - | Rice Menorial fdair Park Pittman Park Rethlenem Center School Total Served by MH. A. Jones Elementary Scaool Howell Park . ° West ind Park Norcross Playlot Haynes Play lot Oakland City Playlot Graddadk School School Total Served by Peyton Forrest Elementary School Playlot - 2185 Verbena Street ° 600 690 800 300 2 —] a 500 500 500 ~ 500 670 200 S76 500 1600  APBA TOTAL NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS Wilson Avenue 700 Tremont Drive : 900 Collier Parks - 1100 English Park 500 Wilson Mills Park _300 . School Total 5600 Served by Pryor Street School Capitol A Ponuey Pay ot 1500 #d Cook Recreation Center 1500 Wesley House , 800 Tra Recreation . « 1500 Pryor sineet School 2 ; 3000. Washington-fyder 1000 Dodd Playlot : 1000 Playlot - 71 Little Street + 1000 Playlot - 941 McDaniel Street cr | 600 Playlot - Georgia and McDaniel Street 650 Playlot Siaeaee Stadiun Parkins Lot 750 Playlot ~ Mary and Coleman Street 600 School Total 12,100 So st f Served by D. H. Stanton School Haygood and Crew Sureet Playlot ; 900 Daniel Stanton Park 900 Richardson Street Genter | 1000 Connally Street Center — 650 E, P. Johnson | 1000 School Total 150 *s 4 PROSL&NS ENCOUNT SHED Inadequate preparation of food. The trucks still have not been provided with a cage in. order to hold food in place. Schools were not provided with enougn ice, . The sandwiches were too dry because there was plain peanut ‘butter. In addition, in traveling to various schools, I found that brownies were being made with peanut butter and were not completely cooked, I believe the meals offered could be more substantial if certain other commodities were prepsred., for examole, the meals would be much better if meats were added to the sup- plements. page 5 AREA TOTAL NUMBS¥ OF PARTICIPANTS Served by Walter White School. Walter White School 2000 Art Abner Place 700 A. D, Williams : 1000 School Total 3700 TOTAL NUMBER OF ARHAS: 67 GRAND TOTAL 67, 345 This week's total represents an increase of 22,75 over the previous week, on  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 1, Folder 22, Document 30 Box 1 Box 1 Folder 22 Folder topic: Parks department | 1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/c51e94f5f9c24c0052a7ab266dfc8799.pdf f3f357f7ba3cad4f7b657af500c8c6e3 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. l( ~ p • / , .- , I . - ·.; -··~ .Jr S.~i~ rt/1ENT OF P/\Rl<S AND RECREATION \) ~~ fij~ CITY HALL ANNEX ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 ~ - June 28, 1969 . M- E M OR AND UM J ACK C . DELIUS G.ENERAL MANAGE R ST ANLEY T. MART IN, JR. _ A SS T. GEN . MA N I\GER TO: _ ·Miss Jimmie Mims F. P I ERCE VIHIT L EY ASST. GEN. fl.A tJ f . GER CA R L VI . RYALS, JR. SR . AD M IN . A SSISTANT VI RG IIII A CAR MI C HA E L DI R. O F R EC R EA T I O N FROM: Mike Cie lin ski o/'f}'r- SUBJECT: Food P rog-ram Attached you will find a report for the week June 23rd through LTune 27th. of Included in this report once again are re comme ndations, a nd problems which w·e r e enco untered du ri ng this wee k 's · o pe r a tion. 0 ·- .c":-_f-,::i.f' -- '•.,9~-... .' ,.:-·'1_.,. .' ~ \ ,,- .~:; ' '"\'-.' t2 ·, i,. .) \ r'... ! .~ • . . ~-~~---~-~--------~--- ...,,.~-.'----·-- -- � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document ee j \ YERs fe f Z Cs BAYA. As wert | — justi : Ae . ! DAw Seo des Lotes ry Se vA WE FAT LAA Rewer Wed TEQERARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION s CITY HALL ANNEX ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 June 28, 1°69 MEMORANDUM JACK C, DELIUS GENERAL MANAGER -Miss Jimmie Mims STANLEY T. MARTIN, JR. _ ASST. GEN. MANAGER TOs. F. PIERCE WHITLEY ASST. GEN. MANAGER . L, . BS = VD CARL W. RYALS, JR. FROM: Mike Cielinski HAC ‘ SR. ADMIN. ASSISTANT Dinsomneonerraee SUBJECT: Food Program Attached you will find a report for the week of June 23rd through June 27th Includéd in this report and problems which were once again are recommendations, encountered during this week's operation. oT sGni On KN a ors fay a! = a] a we ft tn -.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 1, Folder 22, Document 29 Box 1 Box 1 Folder 22 Folder topic: Parks department | 1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/0e086433bbe959f96ef24e7c8423005d.pdf a0b568e42939e1889a8dd35ecddd38ae Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. _,.. ~;I.~;;/~~,!~. ii ..-:i-:'.--<?-:, ' :, . : .. ·:i,· ,. . . ·-. . ... . .. ·!.~ !':·143.215.248.55. ~t ~: ·--~;, - ---~·-,·;.' / ..-- - •· · ·, •t • . I I ... '~ I' ~ .": • ' ~; '. • ~ DEPARTMHlT OF PARKS AND RE CREAT ION • . CI TY HA LL Al~NEX . }'.:td:;11::; fj:'{t!I ATLANTA , GEORGIA 30303 October ........, <.: ~... ·-...... 23 , 1969 .> . - J ACK ~ . DEL IUS GE NERAL MANAGER M E M O R A N D U M STANLEY T. MART I N , J R. ASS T. GEN . MANAGER F. PI ERCE WHI TL EY ASST.G E N . MANAGER C ARL VI. RYALS, JR . SR. ADM I N. ASS ISTANT V IRG I N I A CARMICHAE L DIR. O F RE,CREATION TO: -Jimmie Mims , As sis t ant Director of Recreation FROM : Jack C. Delius, Gene ral Manager SUBJECT : Rec r eati on Assistance to Faye tt e , Mississippi Mayo r Charles Ev ers \ Ber t a Frizzel l ha s checke d th e ai rli nes and finds that De lta fli es into Natc hez , Mississippi which is the n earest airport apparently to Fayette, Mis si ssippi . The tra nsportation round trip touri st class is $115 . 5 .0 . I will r e ques t for you this amount of mone y plus $25 . 00 p er diem expense for the one night you probably will . stay and $25 . 00 . t ravel expense for a total request of $ 1 65 . 50 . I make r eference on the request for travel expenses to the fact that Mr. Dan Sweat ha s asked 0s to give assistanc e t o Faye tt e, Mississippi . As t o the cost of construction of the r ec r eation buildinggymnasium and other items, I he l d a meeting this morning with the Park Engineers and we came up with some rough ballfield prices . First of a ll, a recreation building that would includ e a regulation college typ e basketba ll court with two small courts crosswise, rollaway bleache rs, a r ecreation or multi -purpose room, a library, dance studio, locke r room, showers, e tc . ,·as we ll as a special club and trophy room would c e rtainly add up to at l east 12,900 square feet . I have analyzed the square footage in several of the b e tt e r gymnasiu m-recreati on building compl exes in Ge orgia s uch as Da lton and East Point and find they run sl i g htly over 12,000 s quare fee t. Th e Park Engineers have es timated cost of construction of this typ e of building at a bout $20.00 p er square foot and so you could say that this building, less land, would cost b e tween $200,000-$240,000. Now, that figure would not include the cos t of i nstalling l ockers, etc . f,,'-iT r. ~\.... / .c-· l';- "'.·.. , �MEMORANDUM Jimmi e Mims Octob er 23, 1 969 As to an outdoor recrea tion area , the information we have from Fayette, Miss issippi is rather nebulous . The cost of a multiple purpose game court is running about $3,500 each here in At lanta . It can be done out of concrete and you could skate on it and have other act i vit i es r e quiring a hard . surface such as basketball, e tc. Basketball courts are also running about $3,500 each ; badminton courts about $3 ,000 each, voll eyball courts about $3,000 , and doubl e court t ennis faciliti es about $7,000 . The engineers es timat e that out door handball courts properly construct ed and f e n ced would run about $2,000 each . The co s t of constructing a baseba ll .d i amond, socc er fi e ld, quar t er mil e cinder track , arch ery range and hors eshoe pit s , if in fact the land is fai r ly level and requir es little grading, would run about $25 ,000 including the lighting . It is worth noting that we have spent up to $15,000 for just the light for a l arge baseball diamond . As to the campsites , they run about $500 each . Outdoor toil e t ·facilities are shockingly expensive . We have spent up to $20,000 for ladi es and mens r es trooms . However, the engineers think that from $8,000 -10,000 would cover this it em . Mis s issippi might want to build their own or conside r buying one alre~dy pre-fabricated from Sup er Secure in California. You will recall that we have us ed Super Secure at Anderson and.Bedford - Pine . The water fountains ccst $160 . 00 ea~h p lus installation and water pipe . We are not sure about item 7 11 The outdoor area which should b e light e d 11 and thus we are refraining from g iving any s ort of pric e . We r eally don 1 t know what siz e area the y are _talking a bout. The las t item, number 8, calls for construction of a strong fence around the entire playarea . A six foot fence of reasonably sturdy gauge runs about $4 . oo a foot installe d . In othe r word s , a 100 f ee t would cost $400.00; a 1,000 fe e t, .a $1,000.00. I am sending Dan Sweat a copy of thi s memorandum and hav e a call into him at this time to ask him whether I should proceed to make a r e ques t for your travel expenses. JCD:bf cc: Dan Swe at Dan: Jimmie Mims is on a very badly needed vacation and wil l be back on duty Monday, October 27, and could leave mos t anytime a ft e~ that for the trip to Fayette. � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document JACK C. DELIUS GENERAL MANAGER STANLEY T. MARTIN, JR. ASST. GEN. MANAGER F. PIERCE WHITLEY ASST. GEN. MANAGER CARL W. RYALS, JR. SR. ADMIN. ASSISTANT VIRGINIA CARMICHAEL DIR. OF RECREATION DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION _ CITY HALL ANNEX ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 October 23, 1969 MEMORANDUM OO? Jimmie Mims, Assistant Director of Recreation : 4 FROM: Jack C. Delius, General Manager eA SUBJECT: Recreation Assistance to Fayette, Mississippi - Mayor Charles Evers Berta Frizzell has checked the airlines and finds that Delta flies into Natchez, Mississippi which is the nearest airport apparently to Fayette, Mississippi. The transportation roundtrip tourist class is $115.50. I will request for you this amount of money plus $25.00 per diem expense for the one night you probably will. stay and $25.00. travel expense for a total request of $165.50. I make reference on the request for travel expenses to the fact that Mr. Dan Sweat has asked us to give assistance to Fayette, Mississippi. As to the cost of construction of the recreation building- gymnasium and other items, I held a meeting this morning with the Park Engineers and we came up with some rough ballfield prices. First of all, a recreation building that would include a regulation college type basketball court with two small courts crosswise, rollaway bleachers, a recreation or multi-purpose room, a library, dance studio, locker room, showers, etc.,'as well as a special club and trophy room would certainly add up to at least 12,000 square feet. I have analyzed the square footage in several of the better gymnasium-recreation building complexes in Georgia such as Dalton and East Point and find they run slightly over 12,000 square feet. The Park Engineers have estimated cost of construction of this type of building at about $20.00 per square foot and so you could say that this building, less land, would cost between $200,000-$240,000. Now, that figure - would not include the cost of installing lockers, etc. MEMORANDUM Jimmie Mims October 23, 1969 As to an outdoor recreation area, the information we have from Fayette, Mississippi is rather nebulous. The ' cost of a multiple purpose game court is running about $3,500 each here in Atlanta. It can be done out of conerete and you could skate on it and have other activities requiring a hard. surface such as basketball, etc. Basketball courts are also running about $3,500 each; badminton courts about $3,000 each, volleyball courts about $3,000, and double court tennis facilities about $7,000. The engineers estimate that outdoor handball courts properly constructed and fenced would run about $2,000 each. The cost of constructing a baseball.diamond, soccer field, quarter mile cinder track, archery range and horseshoe pits, if in fact the land is fairly level and requires little grading, would run about $25,000 including the lighting. It is worth noting that we have spent up to $15,000 for just the light for a large baseball diamond. As to the campsites, they run about $500 each. Outdoor toilet facilities are shockingly expensive. We have spent up to $20,000 for ladies and mens restrooms. However, the engineers think that from $8,000-10,000 would cover this item. Mississippi might want to build their own or consider buying one already pre-fabricated from Super Secure in California. You will recall that we have used Super Secure at Anderson and Bedford-Pine. The water fountains ccst $160.00 each plus installation and water pipe. We are not sure about item 7 "The outdoor area which should be lighted" and thus we are refraining from giving any sort of price. We really don't know what size area they are talking about. The last item, number 8, calls for construction of a strong fence around the entire playarea. A six foot fence of reasonably sturdy gauge runs about $4.00 a foot installed. In other words, a 100 feet would cost $400.00; a 1,000 feet, a $1,000.00. I am sending Dan Sweat a copy of this memorandum and have a call into him at this time to ask him whether I should proceed to make a request for your travel expenses. JCD: bf ce: Dan Sweat Dan: Jimmie Mims is on a very badly needed vacation and will be back on duty Monday, October 27, and could leave most anytime after that SOF the _ to Fayette.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 1, Folder 22, Document 28 Box 1 Box 1 Folder 22 Folder topic: Parks department | 1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/2b7bbb94dfeb6b45f3ecd80598e9c015.pdf 83fc027b54f9f0eaa411039624ef22a2 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. CITY OF .ATLANT.A CITY HALL ATLANTA, GA. 30303 Tel. 522-4463 Area Code 404 IVAN ALLEN, JR., MAYOR R EARL LANDERS, Administrative Ass istant MRS. ANN M. MOSES , Executive Secretary DAN E. SWEAT, JR ., Director of Governmental Liaison · June 27, 1969 MEMORANDUM TO: Johnny Robinson FROM: George J. Berry SUBJECT: City-owned lot at Richardson and Conley Streets. At your request, I reviewed our situation on this piece of property with the foll owing findings : 1. In 1944, Mayor Hartsfield granted an elderly lady permission to use this lot. The city had owned it for a very long time. In the late 1800' s the lot had been used as a dump for "night soil. " The lady had continued to use t he prope r ty and had some sort of church constructed on it which the City Housing Code Division has recently requi re d her to de m olish . Cons e quently, she does not now occupy the property . This lady now feels that she has a legal right to the prop e rty, howeve r, because she has had effective possession for this l ength of tim e. 2. In 1967 th e City Parks Department was investigati ng all city - o wn e d p r ope r ty to determine th e i r feas i bili ty fo r us e a s playl ot s . Whe n Jack D e lius was investigating thi s p roperty the eld erly lady (kno w n loc ally as "the witch docto r") plac e d a "hex " o n h im fo r p r opos i ng to us e h er p r oper ty . 3. Becaus e of it s po s s ible us e by the Parks D e p artment, the Law Department initiated an action to determine the validity of the city's title . Associate City Attorney, Ralph Jenkin s , represente d the city and while he wa s unable to remove the hex from Mr. D eliu s , did s ucceed in w i nning the case and clearing the city' s title to the lot . �June 27, 1969 Memo to Johnny Robinson Page Two 4. Pete Williams of the Land Department says that the boundaries of the lot need to be surveyed. He feels that an adjoining building is encroaching on the property. 5. Because of the time factor, the Parks Department arranged for another playlot in the vicinity with which they are satisfied. Mr. Delius advised me that they now have no plans to use this lot. 6. Mr. Jenkins advised me by telephone that if the city is serious in wanting to assert its title to this property, it is important that this property be put to some definite use or it be declared surplus and sold. I did not inquire into his legal reasons for this position, but he felt that the failure of the city to act would strengthen the claimant's case and could possibly result in overturning the court's decision . A third alternative, therefor e , would be to abandon the property to the claimant. Very truly yours , GJB :p � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document CITY OF ATLANTA CITY HALL ATLANTA, GA. 30303 Tel. 522-4463 Area Code 404 IVAN ALLEN, JR., MAYOR R. EARL LANDERS, Administrative Assistant : MRS, ANN M, MOSES, Executi t June 27 , 19 69 DAN E. SWEAT, JR., Director ota ieihaaii Liaison MEMORANDUM TO: Johnny Robinson FROM: George J. Berry SUBJECT: City-owned lot at Richardson and Conley Streets. At your request, I reviewed our situation on this piece of property with the following findings: l. In 1944, Mayor Hartsfield granted an elderly lady permission to use this lot. The city had owned it for a very long time. In the late 1800's the lot had been used as a dump for "night soil.'' The lady had continued to use the property and had some sort of church constructed on it which the City Housing Code Division has recently required her to demolish. Consequently, she does not now occupy the property. This lady now feels that she has a legal right to the property, however, because she has had effective possession for this length of time. 2. In 1967 the City Parks Department was investigating all city-owned property to determine their feasibility for use as playlots. When Jack Delius was investigating this property the elderly lady (known locally as "the witch doctor") placed a "hex'' on him for proposing to use her property. 3. Because of its possible use by the Parks Department, the Law Department initiated an action to determine the validity of the city's title. Associate City Attorney, Ralph Jenkins, represented the city and while he was unable to remove the hex from Mr. Delius, did succeed in winning the case and clearing the city's title to the lot, June 27, 1969 Memo to Johnny Robinson Page Two 4, Pete Williams of the Land Department says that the boundaries of the lot need to be surveyed. He feels that an adjoining build- ing is encroaching on the property. Because of the time factor, the Parks Department arranged for another playlot in the vicinity with which they are satisfied. Mr. Delius advised me that they now have no plans to use this lot. Mr. Jenkins advised me by telephone that if the city is serious in wanting to assert its title to this property, it is important that this property be put to some definite use or it be declared surplus and sold. I did not inquire into his legal reasons for this position, but he felt that the failure of the city to act would strengthen the claimant's case and could possibly result in overturning the court's decision, A third alternative, therefore, would be to abandon the property to the claimant. Very truly yours, George J, Berry GJB:p  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 1, Folder 22, Document 27 Box 1 Box 1 Folder 22 Folder topic: Parks department | 1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/e5e94fd0aee7554761a4a1a57b90a48c.pdf 65ce3ccdbb27f26dc58f80f58bfdbf29 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. October 6, 1969 MEMORANDUM To: Mayor Allen From: Dan Sweat Subject: Proposed $100, 000 Park Project W have be n un bl · to secur wh t w feel re good recommend tions for project through th usual ources and h v , th r Sol"e, taken the lib rty of ng th reeomm nd tion ourselv s . In su g sting poeslbl proj ct w re som what at di advantage in not knowing th I: lings of the donor . Fo7 xatnple, ls h motivat d by charit bl con ider tion hkh would lend itself to pl'oject in ome· die dv tag d rea? Is he motiv ted by rtletic cons i d r tions? Hietol'ic: con ldel'ation ? Do h wt h . proj ct to b memori l to him lf or hi•! mily? In th · v nt that the City w 1' to ~ c lv an unantlclpat d $100, 000 gr t, lt ould b - our hope th t th • fun<! could be pent in the downto £or tho be.neflt a.nd .njoyment ot 11 Atl ntan • OuJ' c ntral city l ot landmai,k and b uty e pot ven though h ve had a pro r b utlfying small p re l s a7oa:nd · · city in r c .. t year • For thi r so:n, w hav u g d o ~l° 1 proj ete t t owd le d eha..r ct r d id nfi,.. fie tton to t town t . a • w• ln a dltion,~ • ha.v 1 hbo;rhood • 1. su o am U p rk pii-oj ct• to aerv pecific ctio ot.t ounced, it i• un:tuiuie..a ot be ullt for �M mo to Mayor Allen Page Two Octob r 6, 1969 · om time'il Th plan th t the Park Engineer h ve d velop d a.:re lmaginativ .,. This part· will b "Hurt Park11 type focal point in wh~t is lready sub tantial n ighborhood of n w oiiice building • r t 1U' nts , tc:. 2.. uti.fic tlon of Five Pointe.. Not just · f w trees , but a r al ffort to conv rt th r into a landmark area . New 1dewe.lks • • • imaginative r d ign of th traffic isl nds with pl tings , tc • ., new as light lamp such s thos us d in Under round Atlanta • .. • om ort of stata ry or · t work th t would er at the ttention (to a le ser degre ) a"' do s the Pie a o in Chicago. One problem her might b pac • but th . clo ingof the hort tr !fie lane b tw n the tr file island and the William Oliv · r Bul:1.ding d the Ba nk 0£ Geol' i Building so a to c:re le plaz might b f ibl .• 3. Purc:h s nd be utify th· old filling tio11 it _ (now~ in ff ct, traffic island) at Memorial and C ntl' . Thi int . r etf.on is jor .ntz ce into th downto n re ,. p ei lly th gove'"'nmenta.1 ct:ion. Thb proj ct h b en propo ed in th fiv - y r c pital lmprov m.ent pro rt.in,. but no provisions hav be n made for- £unding the proj · ct in th for s · bl futur • 4. C v r ion o£ Curri l' Str - t. Thi tr et ls j t two block long i-unnlng hom P 1.cht:r to Piedmont t th A udltol'iqm nd Exhibit B H rnaln :ntranc: • Thi eould b bandon d st:r, t nd conv rted to a par -Uk mall for ped atrian tr flc from Pe cbt• into th Civic: Ce I' Compl.x. The only problem i tha.t thi tre t bord r ·· th· o1 th• p~op rty propo d • t n . Cr . yhoun.d B . T rminal d th xietlng parking n rvlce t cillty for A alt Sy 5. Pu.re •• of hbtoric houa• for renovation d p rvatio • tla h hon on •ucl'l hiatoric f tu,., • The te ..bellum Judge hou• on · rburn Road i,1 pot lblllty. The Col. L. P. Or · nt home on t. Paul A ven , 5. • h pirobably too £ar ao •·· Th hbt lcal eoct.ty could J' commend o • 6. .n pdn • Thi ttr•el in Henl'y Cr ·dy l' C nh- n d ... · • a. g&a U ,. tr and o tr �Memo to Mayor Allen Page Thr October 6 , 1969 7. A focal point such as the St. Louis Arch. Atlanta. 1 0 could b an rti tic cone ptlo.a of the Phoenix Rising" is depict d on the Se • It ehould be of irnpressiv _ size and pl ced in a loc tioo that would command attention. Inside or in connection with the Interchange might b a good plac. i£ it could b WOJ'ked out. One other pos sibl place would b th area of the Brookwood Int rch ng on ithel' tne rail10 d property o,:, on Atlantic Steel property if l"i'angem nto could be :made, Neighbo_~hood Proje_c ts 1. v 1opmcnt of a mall neighborhood p rk on th prop rty locat d t White Stre t and Ro e Circl in Southw t Atl t • Thi pro rty is juat on th ed ~ of th We t End Urb n R newal Project,, but 11ot m jor r dev lopment in thl rea i in th pl _n • B caus - it is in the 'ted v lopm nt ar , h ver, the pro rty can b d dlc t d to the City a.nd all of th !und ean go into improv m nts . 2. D v loprnent oi play lot in th Linc;oln Home a~ al northw st .Atlant . This ie on public housing property and c ab · d dlc t d so th t 1 of th don · d !uad can b u ed tot d v lopm.nt. DS:j � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document October 6, 1969 MEMORANDUM To: '_ Mayer Allen From: Dan Sweat Subject: Proposed $100, 000 Park Project We have been unable to secure what we feel are good recommendations for projects through the usual sources and have, therefore, taken the liberty of making these recommendations ourselves. In suggesting possible projects we are somewhat at a disadvantage in not knowing the feelings of the donor. For example, is he motivated by charitable considerations which would lend itself to a project in some disadvantaged area? Is he motivated by artistic considerations? Historical considerations? Does he wish the project to be a memorial to himself or his family? In the event that the City were to receive an unanticipated $100, 000 grant, it would be our hope that these funds could be spent in the downtown area for the benefit and enjoyment of all Atlantans. Our central city is short of landmarks and beauty spots even though we have had a program of , beautifying small parcels around the city in recent years. For this reason, we have suggested several projects that would lend character and idenfi- fication to the downtown areas. In addition, we have suggested two small park projects to serve specific neighborhoods. Central City Projects 1. The redevelopment of the Pershing Point Park at the intersection of the Peachtrees. Even though this has been publicly announced, it is unfunded and, considering other priorities, it will probably not be built for i nie Memo to Mayor Allen Page Two October 6, 1969 4. 5. 6, some time, The plans that the Park Engineers have developed are imaginative. This park will be a Hurt Park" type focal point in what is already a substantial neighborhood of new office buildings, restaurants, etc. Beautification of Five Points. Not just a few trees, but a real effort to convert the area into a landmark area. New sidewalks... imaginative redesign of the traffic islands with plantings, etc., new gas light lamps such as those used in Underground Atlanta. . . some sort of statuary or art work that would create the attention (to a lesser degree) as does the Picasso in Chicago. One problem here might be space, but the closingof the short traffic lane between the traffic island and the William Oliver Bubiding and the Bank of Georgia Building so as to create a plaza might be feasible, Purchase and beautify the old filling station site (now, in effect, a traffic island) at Memorial and Central. This intersection is a major entrance into the downtown area, especially the governmental section, This project has been proposed in the five-year capital improvement program, but no provisions have been made for funding the project in the foreseeable future. Conversion of Currier Street. This street is just two blocks long running from Peachtree to Piedmont at the Auditorium and Exhibit Hall main entrance. This could be abandoned as a street and converted to a park-like mall for pedestrian traffic from Peachtree into the Civic Center Complex. The only problem is that thie street borders the rear of the property proposed as the new Greyhound Bus Terminal and also the existing parking and service facility for the Atlanta Transit System, Purchase of a historic house for renovation and preservation. Atlanta is short on such historic featuges, The ante-bellum Judge house on Fairburn Road is a possibility. The Col..L.P. Grant home on St. Paul Avenue, S,E. is probably too far gone. The historical society could recommend one. Beautification of Marietta Street between Five Points and Spring, This wide street has perhaps the best potential of any other street in the centra business district and already includes the distinctive Henry Grady monument, An imaginative median could be designed . ..:a gas light therne could be continued up from Five Points. . . trees and other plantinge could be provided such as was done along Peachtree at Peachtree Center. . . perhaps a fountain.  Memo to Mayor Allen Page Three October 6, 1969 7. A focal point such as the St. Louis Arch, Atlanta's could be an artistic conception of the ''Phoanix Rising'' as is depicted on the Seal, It should be of iropressive size and placed in a location that would command attention, Inside or in connection with the Interchange might be a good place if it could be worked out. One other possible place would be the area of the Brookwood Interchange on either the vailroad property or on Atlantic Steel property if arrangements could be made, Neighborhood Projects l. Bevelopment of a small neighborhood park on the property located at White Street and Rose Circle in Southwest Atlanta, This property is just on the edge of the West End Urban Renewal Project, but not major redevelopment in this area is in the plans. Because it is in the redevelopment area, however, the property can be dedicated to the City and all of the funds can go into improvements. 2. Development of a play lot in the Lincoln Homes area of northwest Atlanta. This is on public housing property and can also be dedicated so that all of the donated funds can be used for development. DS:ja eee Ee SOULE 7 EP eee es ct tint  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 1, Folder 22, Document 26 Box 1 Box 1 Folder 22 Folder topic: Parks department | 1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/c43472981d764827f38368ecbc39335a.pdf a9caded97c67a6a0ca90f94d62be2515 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. -- - - - 11 I July 7 11 1969 MEMO TO: $9 J c J c. SUBJECt: Shutt:la _ · nk rf "= OU , ANf> U GStstant Oir Ct~ £ U.us, ~ . rtei- 1 t-l,'.111ag-«;lt of Parka -a nd . s • t1 ta Stadt - to City Hell t ion ecre ti.on � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document ny “aay July 7, 1969 MEMORANDUH TO: Miss Jimmie Mims, Assistant Director of Recreation FROM: Jack ©, Delius, General Manager of Parks and Recreation SUBJECT: Shuttle Bus + Atlanta Stadium toe City Hell In that Miss Carmichael is on vacation thie week I am addressing this matter to you. Mr, Howard Monroe, Superintendent of City Hall, advises that the bus wa are operating to transport employees to and from City Hall and the Atlanta Stadium Parking Lot has received something less than a hearty reception from employees. Presently fewer than five are utilizing the bus. Mr. Monroe advises that he will recommend to Mr. Landers that the transportation be discontinued by the end of this week. This will give him time te notify the few Who are riding, Also Mr. Monroe advises that on several moruings the bus has been quite late, ‘This morning Mr. Monroe understood that it did not even run, but I saw it myself and it was probably very ; by the 50,000 odd delegates to the religious convention at the Atlanta Stadiun. In any event, speak to the driver about being on time and perhaps if it is advisable you might warn him that it appears by the end of the week we will discontinue this service. Thank you very much. JCD: jw ec: Mr. J. Howard Monroe, Superintendent, City Hall Mr. Earl Landers, Mayor's Office ——  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 1, Folder 22, Document 25 Box 1 Box 1 Folder 22 Folder topic: Parks department | 1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/6e15e1c43e003369a11a810af52a463c.pdf 6a7667b8575fdb81fe79656135d70f2e Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. CITY OF ATLANTA DEPARTMENT OF PARKS OFFICE OF GENERAL MANAGER ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 JACK C. DELI US G EN ER A L MANA GER • F R ED P . WHIT LE Y A SST . May 19, 1969 GE N. M A NAGE R FRED. W. BO SWEL L A SST . GE N.MAN A G ER VIRGINIA CARMI C HAEL. CIR . O F RE CREATION MEM O RAND U M S T AN LE Y T . MARTIN AD M I N . ASS IST A NT TO: All Park and Recreation Supervisors and Foremen FROM: Stan Martin• Assistant General Manager of Parks SUBJECT: Opening of Swimming Pools for 1969 Season All swimming pools will open on Saturday, June 7, 1969, and will remain open through Labor Day, September 1, 1969. The hours of operation will be from 12 Noon until 8:30 P.M., Monday through Saturday and from 1:00 P.M. until 8 : 30 P.M. on Sundays , Swimming classes will be taught by our staff for a period of eight weeks beginning June 16 through August 8 from 10:00 A.M. until 12 Noon, Monday through Friday. Children 12 years old and under will be allowed to swim free from 12 Noon until 2:00 P.M., Monday through Saturday. All port-a-pools will be open from June 7 through Labor Day, and will be used only for organized swimming classea supervised by our recreation staff. STMJr:bt � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document CITY OF ATLANTA DEPARTMENT OF PARKS OFFICE OF GENERAL MANAGER ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 JACK C. DELIUS GENERAL MANAGER “ FRED P. WHITLEY ASST. GEN. MANAGER May 19, 1969 ASST. GEN. MANAGES aR eae ene Shite manne MEMORANDUM TO: All Park and Recreation Supervisors and Foremen FROM: Stan Martin, Assistant General Manager of Parks SUBJECT: Opening of Swimming Pools for 1969 Season All swimming pools will open on Saturday, June 7, 1969, and will remain open through Labor Day, September 1, 1969. The hours of operation will be from 12 Noon until 8:30 P.M., Monday through Saturday and from 1:00 P.M. until 8:30 P.M. on Sundays, Swimming classes will be taught by our staff for a period of eight weeks beginning June 16 through August 8 from 10:00 A.M, until 12 Noon, Monday through Friday. Children 12 years oid and under will be allowed to swim free from 12 Noon until 2:00 P.M., Monday through Saturday. All port-a-pools will be open from June 7 through Labor Day, and will be used only for organized swimming classes supervised by our recreation staff. STMJr:bf  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 1, Folder 22, Document 24 Box 1 Box 1 Folder 22 Folder topic: Parks department | 1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/6aee6a8846e8ea6a00cde4ec18db371d.pdf 050f6835a966e0ac65bedeea400bbe3e Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. SUH-MEG EXTENSION OPii'IGE ,50tl McDaniel Sta Apt. 18_53 Atlanta , Georgia 30312 I I fRO~OSED ~ROGRAM STRUCTURE for RECREA'l1I ON FACILITY IN 1'-LECHANICSVILLE Io FOCUS ' To meet the needs of the community, the recreation faci lfty should have a comprehensive program. The program should be broad a.nd inclusive enough to provide activities for all age groupso The activities should include: athletics, table games, a variety of outdoor games, interest groups~ a gameroom for small kids, a quiet room for reading and lounge, coed groups and activities, and adult groups and a ctivitieso The governing body for the facility is an elected, 12-member Advis ory Board. The Board is made up of persons from the Jvie chani csville community . They are as follows: Rev. F.W. Melville, Chairman Mrs. Rosa Hampton, Vice Chairman Mrs. Rosa Griffin, Secretary Mrs. Bertha Barton, Assistant Secretary Rev. M.M. Thomas, Treasurer Mrs .. Annie R 0 Newton (s·'7 '7 - S li..\v Miss Lois Wilson ~rs. Emma Thomas ( 4 young people will be elected to the Board) I I . PROGRAM A. Softball l o 20 teams ac 5-10& under te ams ( 3 boys and 2 girls ) b., 5-12 & under teams ( 3 boys and 2 girl s ) c. 5-15 & under te ams {j boys and 2 gi rls ) d. 2-17 & under teams {l boy and 1 giri ) e. J Adult teruns ( 2 men and jj 1 women) �I ( B. page 2 { Baseball I 5 teams a. l.;.10 & under team b. 1-12 & under tes.m Cc, 1-15 & under · team / / d. 1-17 & under team e. 1 adult team 1. 1 >~-·--=- ·· c. Gym Activities (inside rag house) 1. 2 table tennis Sets 2. 2 Billiard Tables 3o 2 Caron Boards 4. l Weightlifting set 5. 2 card tables (for checkers) D. Game Room (for small kids) 1. Table games 2. Selected activities '-----.... ..______ E. . A Quiet Room - _ __ l . "'For Re a ding 2. lounge for staff 3. For counse ling 4. For small meetings F. Other Outside Games 1. Volleyball 2. Basketball 3. Cro que t 4., Horse shoe s 5. Soccer {outside Goals) G. Other Adult ,Activities 1. Barbe cues 2. Othe r Suggeste d Activities He Coed Activities le A Youth Council 2., Youth Social Activities a . Dances b .. Parties -- �Io Phys~cal Equipment and De velopme nts I 1. Softball and baseball fields developed (leveled and scraped) 2o Spectator seats on softball and baseball fields J. A 5ft. fence to enclose the area. 1 4, The Building needs painting and decorating on the inslde A telephone needs to be installed I (I} . L--\ 11 t-i , s -Ic L D · J • Staff 5. r 1. 3 Male Workers ao 1 worker for gym activities(inside). b. 2 workers for softball and baseball fields 2. 5 a. b. c. d, Female Workers 1 worker for gym activities (inside) 1 worker for game room (for small kids) 2 workers for softball and other outside games. 1 worker to serve as receptionist-secretary. Submitted by: Grady Butler Extension Area Mgr. SUJvI-1'-'I.EC Extension Office 5/1/69 � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document ; SUM-MEC EXTENSION OFFICE ae 508 McDaniel St. Apt. 1853 Rae Atlanta, Georgia 30312 GROG HoTLE iV x Telephone 52);-21),0 a 5. Home, 779-GEA3 PROPOSED rROGRAM STRUCTURE . / for RECREATION FACILITY IN MECHANICSVILLE I, Focus To meet the needs of the community, the recreation facility should have a comprehensive program, The program should be broad end inclusive enough to provide.activities for all age groups, The activities should include; athletics, table games, a variety of outdoor games, interest groups, a gameroom for small kids, a quiet room for reading and lounge, coed groups and activities, and adult groups and activities. The governing body for the facility is an elected, 12-momber Advisory Board, The Board is made up of persons from the Mechanicsville community. They are as follows; Rev. F.W. Melville, Chairman Mrs. Rosa Hampton, Vice Chairman Mrs. Rosa Griffin, Secretary Mrs, Bertha Barton, Assistant Secretary Revs MM; Thomas, Treasurer Mrs. Annie R, Newton ([o79 > Scud) Miss Lois Wilson Mrs, Emma Thomas ( hk young people will be elected to the Board) II. PROGRAM A. Softball 1, 20 teams a. 5-10% under teams (3 boys and 2 girls) b. 5-12 & under teams (3 boys and 2 girls) c. 5-15 & under teams (3 boys and 2 girls) d. 2-17 & under teams (1 boy and 1 girl) e. 3 Adult teams (2 men and 7¥7 1 women) De E. Ge He { © | Baseball 1.5 teams a. 1-10 & under team b. l-l2 & under team ec. 1-15 & under team -~ a, 1-17 & under team e. 1 adult team Gym Activities (inside rag house) 1. 2 table tennis Sets 2. 2 Billiard Tables 3. 2 Caron Boards h. 1 Weightlifting set 5. 2 card tables (for checkers) Game Room (for small kids) 1, Table games 2. Selected activities A Quiet Room ; a 1. For Reading 2. lounge for staff 3. For counseling 4. For small meetings Other Outside Games 1. Volleyball . 2. Basketball (outside Goals) 3. Croquet 4. Horseshoes 5. Soccer Other Adult Activities 1. Barbecues 2. Other Suggested Activities Coed Activities 1. A Youth Council 2. Youth Social Activities a, Dances b,. Parties page 2 Ie Physical Equipment and Developments | Je ‘1. Softball and baseball fields developed (leveled and scraped) | 2. Spectator seats on softball and baseball fields ; 3. A 5S£t. fence to enclose the area | h. The Building needs painting and decorating on the inside | 5. A telephone needs to be installed i ond 7 ad a Y. CLVATS ~ FILECD Staff | 1. 3 Male Workers | a. 1 worker for gym activities(inside). b. 2 workers for softball and baseball fields - 2. 5 Female Workers &e 1 worker for gym activities (inside) b. 1 worker for game room (for small kids) c. 2 workers for softball and other outside games, dad. 1 worker to serve as receptionistesecretary. Submitted by: Grady Butler Extension Area Mer. SUM-MECG Extension Office 5/1/69  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 1, Folder 22, Document 23 Box 1 Box 1 Folder 22 Folder topic: Parks department | 1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/07785dd61dd9e82097c0e039585419bc.pdf 0cd0a56f01f35c6cc117be4a937508a3 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. C~TY. ·TA OF DEPARTMENT of PARKS Office of General Manager Atlanta, Georgia 30303 May 2, 1969 MEMORANDUM JACK- C. DELIUS GENERAL MANAGER TO: Mr. Joe Gentry, Parks Engineering Miss Jimmie Mims, Assistant Director of Recreation FROM: Jack c. Delius, General Manager of Parks and Recreation SUBJECT: '--------· . · Eden Rag Company (Ira Street) I am attachin·g ··for each of you a Xerox of a proposed Recreation Program to take place -at the former Eden Rag Company building on Ira Street. I am asking Joe Gentry to coordinate all the improve· ments to the building and the surrounding land, and have already discus sed some of this with Mr. Roland Ebright, Foreman of Adams Park. It will be necessary to ask Fred Shepherd to give us his opinion as soon as possible as to the practicality of moving certain pieces of superstructure in the warehouse section of the building. Also, · Mr. Earl Landers advises that Pete Peterson, of the City Hall, has a number of spare plumbing fixtures we might use in replacing those vandali zed . You should talk to Mr. Grady Butler, the Extension Area Manager of Sum-Mee, and discuss the particulars on the renovation of this building. Overtime is authorized through Range 46 for painters,· carpenters, electricians, to get on this project immediately. Severa l trees will have to be removed, lights added to the field and general illumination (not professional athletic lights), utilities turned on, a telephone installed, etc. Please r e vie w the attached list. Miss Mims, it is the City ·s wish to staff this facility as soon as practical and to supply the equipment on the attached list where possible. Please have your Recreation Coordinator or the Recreation Supervisor work closely with Mr. Butler. An excellent job has been done in organi zing the Neighborhood Advisory Committee, and we should c e rtainly l e nd an ear to their advice. Finally, the first order of business will be to regrade and make playable the ball field to the north of the build ing and the construction of a ball field to the south of the . building. Mr. Butier can fill you in o n this. A nQmber of City official s have expressed personal interest in the success of this program and I --· / �I . I Mr • . Joe Gentry Memo t,o: May 2, 1969 Miss Jimmie Mims I I Page1 2 I __! .: . · --- ·appreciate their cooperation. The Optimist Club of Executive Park may vote to render certain assistance to us with this project and Mr. Johnny Robinson is currently contacting this group to determine what aid may be forthcoming. · JCD:jw cc: ·- Mr. R. Earl . Landers, Mayor·s Office ~ Mr. Johnny Robinson, Community Development Coordinator Mr. Grady Butler, Extension Area Manager, Sum-Mee Extension Office Mr. J. ,D. Chamblee, Parks Maintenance ·Superintendent Mr. Pierce Whitley, Asst. Gen. Mgr. of Parks Mr. Staniey T. Martin, Asst. Gen. Mgr. of Parks Mr. Bob Johnson, Chief Electrician Mr. Fred Shepherd, City Architect Mr. Eddie McLemore, Recreation Supervisor Mr. Ron Ransom, Recreation Coordinator ....,. _ . - - -- ,,, � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document "CITY. OF ATLANTA DEPARTMENT of PARKS Office of General Manager Atlanta, Georgia 30303 “May 2, 1969 Uy i MEMORANDUM BS, ia JACK C. DELIUS s Minas: or GENERAL MANAGER i rs Mr. Joe Gentry, Parks Engineering Miss Jimmie Mims, Assistant Director of Recreation FROM: Jack C. Delius, General Manager of Parks and Recreation SUBJECT: _ Eden Rag Company (Ira Street) I am attaching for each of you a Xerox of a proposed Recreation Program to take place at the former Eden Rag Company building on = Ira Street. I am asking Joe Gentry to coordinate all the improve- ments to the building and the surrounding land, and have already discussed some of this with Mr. Roland Ebright, Foreman of Adams Park. It will be necessary to ask Fred Shepherd to give us his opinion as soon as possible as to the practicality of moving certain pieces of superstructure in the warehouse section of the building. Also, Mr. Earl Landers advises that Pete Peterson, of the City Hall, has a number of spare plumbing fixtures we might use in replacing those vandalized. You should talk to Mr. Grady Butler, the Extension Area Manager. of Sum-Mec, and discuss the particulars on the renovation of this building. Overtime is authorized through Range 46 for painters, carpenters, electricians, to get on this project immediately. Several trees will have to be removed, lights added to the field and general illumination (not professional athletic lights), utilities turned on, a telephone installed, etc. Please review the attached list. Miss Mims, it is the City's wish to staff this facility as soon as practical and to supply the equipment on the attached list where possible. Please have your Recreation Coordinator or the Recreation Supervisor work closely with Mr. Butler. An excellent job has been done in organizing the Neighborhood Advisory Committee, and we should certainly lend an ear to their advice. Finally, the first order of business will be to regrade and make playable the ball field to the north of the building and the construction of a ball field to the south of the building. Mr. Butler can fill you in on this. A number of City officials have expressed personal interest in the success of this program and I Memo to: Mr. Joe Gentry ‘ May 2, 1969 . Miss Jimmie Mims Page 2 ‘appreciate their cooperation. The Optimist Club of Executive Park may vote to render certain assistance to us with this project and Mr. Johnny Robinson is currently contacting this group to determine what aid may be forthcoming. . JCD: jw cc: Mr. R. Earl.Landers, Mayor's Office~ Mr. Johnny Robinson, Community Development Coordinator Mr. Grady Butler, Extension Area Manager, -, Sum-—Mec Extension Office Mr. J..D. Chamblee, Parks Maintenance Superintendent Mr. Pierce Whitley, Asst. Gen. Mgr. of Parks Mr. Stanley T. Martin, Asst. Gen. Mgr. of Parks Mr. Bob Johnson, Chief Electrician Mr. Fred Shepherd, City Architect Mr. Eddie McLemore, Recreation Supervisor Mr. Ron Ransom, Recreation Coordinator ~—  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 1, Folder 22, Document 22 Box 1 Box 1 Folder 22 Folder topic: Parks department | 1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/a0f9c9bbb4dfe2b74fc48b1eafa5fbde.pdf c1f37a985554828af918eee6a482c119 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. March 19, 1969 Mr . Jack C. Delius General Manager Parks D partment Atlanta, Georgia Dear Jack~' W have reviewed your memorandum of March 18, 1969 relating to conce sion bide for North Fulton Golf Cour e and Piedmont Park. Tb bid ubmitted by Mr. Paul Lavin for the North Fulton Oolf Cour nd by Mr . J ~ W. Oldknow for Pi dmont Park ar acceptable by the Mayor . It ie, ther fore , r quested that you proce d to have then c ss ry resolution dr wn nd the contract agreements prep red. Sincerely yours, R. E rl Lander Admlni•tr tive A . sis REL:lp nt � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document March 19, 1969 Mr. Jack C. Delius General Manager Parks Department Atlanta, Georgia Dear Jack" We have reviewed your memorandum of March 18, 1969 rebating to concession bids for North Fulton Golf Course and Piedmont Park. The bids submitted by Mr. Paul Lavin for the North Fulton Golf Course and by Mr. J. W. Oldknow for Piedmont Park are acceptable by the Mayor. Itis, therefore, requested that you proceed to have the necessary resolution drawn and the contract agreements prepared. Sincerely your s, R. Earl Landers Administrative Assistant REL:lp  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 1, Folder 22, Document 21 Box 1 Box 1 Folder 22 Folder topic: Parks department | 1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/3e7ffcee4046e76c4514a9f74e1faceb.pdf 83ed0a3f4659d348bee6b27e076d64d4 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. At>l"il a. 1969 MEMOR.ANDU TO: Mr. Eddie MeLemore. Recreatlon Supervf.acn• PBOH I Jack SUBJBCT1 Mr. Joe Gentry, Pcka Bngf.neei-iog Divialon c. Q48er of P-oks and Recreation De11ua• Genei-al Dev lopaent of temporary C"ecr tf.on f .ci1£ty 1 472 111 Mr . arl Land r , oft tn this d ·pctm .ot t.ak1 Str et, s. w. (Id Coq,any) yor'• Office, baa~ aaed ken tntei:eat ovu the f Bden ~ -DY - t 472 Ir Stre, t, s. w. and converti th facility into- a t of t '*"U'Y r a · al:i,oo. f c,u.c:y. there ie a poeaibiU.ey th building could be r .novated to aoae lildc. d ext nt rut, ae, you - y II th laud djac ot t-o th •ti"Uetur bas been cl · in lo th for · playgJ:"QUDd" • Landet"a h I a keel Mr. Jobnny Robwoa, <:omaiUlltty s a. s CoordJ. tor., to C0017d1nat th1e p,:oJ ct. We ha be n dnaed by Mr. HowAC'd Op nahaw,. the Dir ccor of & • cleVi lo t f~ the Atlaat lfoua _ Ailthori.ty that th rt Company ha, b en acquk d by the Routing . ut~ity nd th4t th forMI" aw-r1ar will •hcnttly b 1IOV1 • ~ t h ~ r II Atlant HoUall Autbot'iey wt,11 be in po1itlo ·t o 1 • for •·-~ C' cw- ation ct:lv1t4 , etc . thi pro etty .. �Memorandum Toe Aprl.l 8, 1969 · ssra. Eddie McLemare/Joe Gentty check with me fi-equently aa to prograaa being mad • JCDajw cc: Deacon Peters, c/o BOA Sum-Mee · ighborhood Center 6S Geor 1a Avenue Me ara. Earl Lander • Mayor's Office .Johnny Robtnson, May.31:• s Of fie ROQald Wolf , Poat Offic Box 1328, Atl nt ., G • 30301 Wtllt .. T. Huntley, 111. i>,:itcbar4 & Jard a, %Ge. 2250 N. ~id HU1o ad wa N.E. Atl ta, GeO.i' 30329 Pat Batton, elo • A. Ston & Associate 482 Armour otrcle:, • ,1 . Atlanta, Goor la 30324 . I � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document April 8, 1969 MEMORANDUM TO3 Me. Eddie McLemore, Recreation Supervisor Mr. Joe Gentry, Parks Engineering Division PROM: Jack C. Delius, General Manager of Parks and Recreation SUBJECT s Development of temporary recreation facility, 472 Ira Street, S. We (Eden Company) Me. Earl Landers, of the Mayor's Office, has expressed keen interest in this department taking over the former Eden Rag Company at 472 Ira Street, S. W. and converting the facility into soma type of temporary recreation facility. There is a possibility the building could be renovated to some limited extent and, as you may know, the land adjacent to the etructure has been cleared in previous months for a playground. Mer. Landers hae asked Me. Johnny Rebinsoa, Community Services Coordinator, to coordinate this project. We have been advised by Mc. Howard Openshaw, the Director of Re- development for the Atlanta Housing Authority that the Eden Rag Company has been acquired by the Housing Authority and that the former owner will shortly be moving. Furthermore, Atlanta Housing Authority will be in a position to lease for summer recreation activities, etc. this property. Tt is our good fortune to have been approached by Me. William T. Huntley, III, President of the Optimist Club of Executive Park, ae well as Messrs. Wolfe and Barron, members of the Optimist Club, whe have expressed a strong interest in assisting with this project. I 3 to the Optimist Club at their 7:30 A.M. breakfast on Monday, Apri ° i would very much like for the two of you to immediately survey the phyeical properties of thie location and make a list of those items which should be corrected. Also, work very closely with Deacon Peters who usually can be contacted at either Model Cities or the E. 0. A. Sum-Mee Center at 65 Georgia Avenue (telephone 577-1351). Also, Deacon Peters gives the name of a Reverend Butler, telephone number 524-2140, who is interested in this project. Beth this department and che Optimist Club is interested in having total neighborhood involvement as to decisions on what will be built here, ete. Please follow this through as rapidly ae possible and Memorandum To: “Ze April 8, 1969 Messrs. Eddie McLemore/Joe Gentry check with me frequently as to progress being made. Thank you very much. JCD jw ec: Deacon Peters, ¢/o EOA Sum-Mec Neighborhood Center 6S Georgia Avenue Messrs. Earl Landers, Mayor's Office Johany Robinson, Mayor's Office Ronald Wolfe, Post Office Box 1328, Atlanta, Ga. 30301 William T. Huntley, IZI, Pritchard & Jerden, Ine. 2250 N. Deuid Hills Rd., NE. Atlanta, Georgia 30329 Pat Barron, c/o Wm. A. Stone & Associates 482 Armour Cirele, N. E. Atlanta, Georgia 30324  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 1, Folder 22, Document 20 Box 1 Box 1 Folder 22 Folder topic: Parks department | 1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/71e52a355762a6b0bb974810d770eedc.pdf 0063c731427da5561cc66fe8fb39a26a Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. Februsry 10, 1969 ME MO R A N D U M TO: Virgini a Ca rmichael, Director of Recreation FROM: J a ck C. Delius, General Manager of Parks & Recreation Miss Hattie Thomas of the Mayor ' s Office has asked me t o i nvestigate the situation i nvolvi ng the prospective employment of Miss Bessie L. Whitehead, f or the position (as I understand it) o f Communi ty Recreat ion Director. Miss Whitehead apparently succe sful ly passed the written part of the examina tion but received a letter dated January 31, 1969 from the Pers onnel Department stating that she had failed the oral. Miss Whitehead further s tates that on February 10, 1969 she "talked to someone in Recreation" who said they s imply c ould not understand how she could have failed the oral. 0 I advised Miss Thomas that we were not privileged t o eiam the oral done by a t l east three different people, one of whom only normally repre sents this department . However, . I would ask you to look into this and see if there has been any mistakes made,, etc . Would you please advise Miss Whitehead at 1220 Gardenia St.,N, W. of the circumstances and also post Miss Thomas in the Mayor's Office . Thank you very much . JCD:bf cc: J~iss Hattie Thomas,, Secretary, Mayo r 's Office � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document February 10, 1969 MEMORANDUM TO: Virginia Carmichael, Director of Recreation FROM: Jack C, Delius, General Manager of Parks & Recreation Miss Hattie Thomas of the Mayor's Office has asked me to investigate the situation involving the prospective employment of Miss Bessie L. Whitehead, for the position (as I understand it) of Community Recreation Director. Miss Whitehead apparently successfully passed the written part of the examination but received a letter dated January 31, 1969 from the Personnel Department stating that she had failed the oral. Miss Whitehead further states that on February 10, 1969 she “talked to someone in Recreation" who said they simply could not understand how she could have failed the oral. I advised Miss Thomas that we were not privileged to exam the oral done by at least three different people, one of whom only normally represents this department. However, I would ask you to hook into this and see if there has been any mistakes made, etc. Would you please advise Miss Whitehead at 1220 Gardenia St.,N.W. of the circumstances and also post Miss Thomas in the Mayor's Office. Thank you very much. JCD: bf ee: AMiss Hattie Thomas, Secretary, Mayor's Office  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 1, Folder 22, Document 19 Box 1 Box 1 Folder 22 Folder topic: Parks department | 1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/be6e3794d4612649fbf2c3489dc6788b.pdf 677ce2cca5232d0fb56fa1c24ab302ec Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. ITY OF ATLAN A DEPARTMENT of PARKS Office of General Manager Atlanta, Georgia 30303 March 18, 1969 MEMORANDUM JACK C. DELIUS GENERAL MANAGER a TO: Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr. FROM: Jack C. Delius, General Manager of Parks and Recreation SUBJECT: Concession Bids for North Fulton Golf Course and Piedmont Park. The Parks Committee of the Board of Aldermen advertised four times the concession privil e ges at North Fulton Golf Course and Piedmont Park. Only one bid was rec eived for e ach of the s e locations. Mr. Paul Lavin, Golf Profe ssional a t North Fulton Golf Cours e, entered the only bid of $1,500. 00 a year for a three - y e ar p e riod. This amount is identic a l to what we were receiving from this concession stand up to 196 7. C o mmitt ee also received o ne bid on the Pie dmont P a rk Concession in the amount of $1,750.00 per year for a two -yea r p er iod. M r. J. W. Oldkn ow, the current C oncessionaire, was the only bidder. He had been paying $1,555.0 0 per year. Parks Committee op ened these bids on March 11 , 1969 and asked that I forward the information to you with their recommendation that we accept these bids. If you should find them acceptable, I shall proceed to have the proper r e solutions drawn, contract agreements prepared, etc. Thank you v e ry much. J C D :jw I/~ -lf?~c~G( A4 3/'f t � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document CITY OF ATLANTA DEPARTMENT of PARKS Office of General Manager Atlanta, Georgia 30303 March 18, 1969 MEMORANDUM JACK C. DELIUS GENERAL MANAGER TO: Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr. FROM: Jack C, Delius, General Manager of Parks and Recreation A SUBJECT: Concession Bids for North Fulton Golf Course and Piedmont Park, The Parks Committee of the Board of Aldermen advertised four times the concession privileges at North Fulton Golf Course and Piedmont Park. Only one bid was received for each of these locations, Mr. Paul Lavin, Golf Professional at North Fulton Golf Course, entered the only bid of $1,500.00 a year for a three-year period. This amount is identical to what we were receiving from this concession stand up to 1967. Committee also received one bid on the Piedmont Park Concession in the amount of $1,750.00 per year for a two-year period. Mr. J. W. Oldknow, the current Concessionaire, was the only bidder, He had been paying $1,555.00 per year. Parks Committee opened these bids on March 11, 1969 and asked that I forward the information to you with their recommendation that we accept these bids, If you should find them acceptable, I shall proceed to have the proper resolutions drawn, contract agreements prepared, etc, Thank you very much, JCD:jw Ole —C#Roceeé Fu y/o  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 1, Folder 22, Document 18 Box 1 Box 1 Folder 22 Folder topic: Parks department | 1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/4d702d32340a731d3e1e44f66f7f7257.pdf 0ab646bec49838f32e8ab9588f36969a Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. Have you e ver applied for City of Atla nt a~ Q e mp\cyrr,~nc? ·' 1("Yes" -chec:k wi th Interviewer b efcre completing chi s form. 5i2-4463, Exe. 267 CITY OF ATLANTA PERSONNEL BOARD Veteran - - - -- - - - - - APPLICATION FOR CIVIL SERVICE EXAMINATION Chauffeur - - - - - - - - - 260 CENTRAL A VENUE, S. W. ATL ANTA, GEORGIA 30303 L icense# - - - - - - - -- Operato r - - - - -- - - -,-,J ,,? --7c;, / / . z:_L ( /)-re/ / 1/(,; , Socia l Security Number: , / / POSITION APPLIED FOR DATE DO NOT USE THIS SPACE DATE OF EXAM .Ir,·, t t-Oi (' _. ~ L ~CND 1Jf1N 9 ~ 1QRQ Discharge ' Medical License I I Experience Trade Report Pase Emp. Additional Remarks: ! ,4-1 _ I Mr. Education Court Record ,/ -- . rl - z. LO ~ . 6 2 -::.t_e,,·. C,:::-~fT //4V a ~ 17 "°. Alternate Number Heighc / 4/~I/ // Check appropriate: / /".. Weight White / - ,O{) o/ v").'ZJ=/.c(/Z.---::::, Telephone Number,· Place of Birch / fl <..--?- ¼-- 7 I/O ,?Lc{,...-4? ~/ _ / A e ·From ·-/2;- - - To C ;z -f.!!«7=:; Are yo u a c iti ze n of the United Scaces ?/c..,,.~v_/c.., -;_;--..., ,_;?'.-;{__=-/.,.,_,_,.., ·(- - - - -- - - - - - - - Wha·c is your husband's or wi fe's n ame? _ _ _:,.1_ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ ~ ~7 z=:;>1ale - - - S in gle ~ i v orced---Widow 0 No. of children Colored - - - Female ~ 1 a rri ed - - - Separated - - - Widower - - - No. of depende nts _,___ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ If answer ro any ques tion be low is " Yes", explain. (Ask for extra sheet if nee d ed). Have you any disease, physical disability, or defect? f} /} Ha ve you ever been treated for a nervous or mental condition? Are you receiving disability compensation? Have you ever be en sued on a debt? fJ O 1J O ,0 I? . - Have .yo u ever h ad y~ur wa.ges garnisheed? ,rf (9 Have you ever filed for or been awarded bankruptcy judgmen t? EXPLANATI ON : - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - -- -- Have you ever been arrested or given a traffic ticket? f 12 Have you a ny p as t due debts? ~/J--'/J-'-___ - - - - - - - - -- - -- - - - - -- -- - - - - - - - - - /J() If "YES" li st all crimes or misd e meanor s, includin g traffic violation s, w ich which you have bee n c h arged. Fail ure to admit any offe ns e regardless of wh e n or where it o ccurred , may cause rejection of applica tion. (A sk for extra sheet if n ecessa ry). _CHARGE List any mac hin es or equipme nt chat you c a n operate e ffici e ntl y. .W2v Ha ve yo u h ad milit ary service? ,.. "'.... w a: N <( J, l: a: 0 11. Are yo u pres e ntl y employe d? _ __,f?..,._..c/,.-,.... 7 ____~ /? f-;; Have you ever worked for the Ci:;o~ Atl a nt a ? - ~fl~.L~. 7_ ___ How many times we re you in se rvi ce ? _ _ _ _ _ __ _ / DO NOT WR IT E BELOW THIS LINE ' Branch of Se rvice Se rv ice Duties Da te en liste d Disch a rge rev ie wed by Dace sepa rate d Reason for dis c h arge Form Ho no ra bl ,. VA l e t te r date d Seria l o r File No . Wh e n _ __ _ Are y ou interes te d in p erma ne nt work?_,..,.-:/ .,.,/J .., .,5%? ~/.' ,,_,_______ .,. 7J/ V '1/,I Are you w illin g to accept te mp orar}' work?' b{fL<' Were a'll di sc h arges "Honorable"? - - - - - - - - - - -- - (IJ > SENTENCE i FINE CITY & STA TE WHEN P e r cent di sa bilit y Re ma rks �Educational Record Name of School & Location .t i ~ /4~"/7,Z- /'4/1/21/,,I(? / V;J/JJ./J·- v;?/4<1,,; v7 :&;· //·-;/ 7 . - ,efJ;; r . / /fl 'i~//4//1'-7 II /Yl/Y) - -·f l/.1/ /{ V ,.,.. _ / "' ....... El.cmencary - Hi gh School Lase Year Atte nd e d -· ly-5q ·vq._,i~· , -- c,..,v(/";,..,,'-',_..1-..,., College1 Univ. ' Post Graduate Encircle highest grade comple_tf. d. . / " ) ., Graduate 1-2-3-4-t§,-7·8 /~·!!.& Ye s ~ - 9-10-1 (i'y No Yes-- ·· N o - -- ~ Degree & Major Subj ect Yes-No - - Yes-NO - - - Trade or Business School . No. of months attended Final Salary;,·· 1) j, I I City Zip Code /,: .."-/ L.1! ~. ,,U ,f:-,_ -. 4 _\· (,, l I State Dare Sta rted I . Dace Left ,f ( ,' \..__,./ Fina l Sa lary _· r .,·., .: , , (.~ Mailing Addre~s ~ / - 'v' .l Number Describe Duties cf _( ·j Street . State City / i ,.{', . / / ~ ·/;,,.,.!_, ' !'.:..- '. Mailing Address Rea s on ·for Le a ving Numbe r Des cribe Duti es , Zip Code Fina l Sala ry Street ') ,. . Dire'ction City '-- State Zip Code /, . Fina l Salary Number De scribe Duties , R eason for Lea vin g i, , <1 C\-•:'-/. ('..t •'./) - I/ j (.,, .) Mailing Addres~ c -/ I ,,, / t.c--.:.1'(_,,,.,-- { · '/ Dace L e ft < /, .') Firm's Na me I - /! - /, _A1i/.'t'. ;;!.. Da ce· Sea. reed .7 - / ·- ... Direction L ·) i '-/ . Firm's Na me ,.. Date Left ·- /i ~- ( i I ! / Dace Sta rt~ Zip Code 1-;:..., L Stree t Dire ctio n ~ / ).,_ 'J..'.-~ !. ._:.,.,:_;__,/ • \... REF E R E N.t ES: Li s t names ~nd comp l ete addresses of three c h arac te r ~e feren ces. Do no t li s t re l atives or former emp l oyers. . ADDRESS - ')' <!-,·'.,.(.~_ 4, "' ,·--(' ~// 65 c~ c.o.. Numbe r cruet S tree t I do solemnly swear (or affirm) chat the statements in this applicatio n are co~plete to/he best j 'my knowl edge,-~ nd b e ~ i e ~ /Cli,;!-,4,U? c/fJ}t lt¼£~.4,J?' ~ ' .,., · S~~of"Appli ca nc ,• J' . . , ... ': / j Directio n Zip Cocle C ity '° -J7 i._. I / Revie.w ed by / �•· . • ' r •' ·--- ·- -- -- - .I EXAMINATION: PLEASE PRINT FULL NAME: 3 (., L- 2 .,..9- ? 79- ,-12 .,a(tjj;.....- - - - - - - DATE +.,'(/_id'-'""_~~,/~~ . -=--.-.~-----~, . >s.,. / 'r,.- .- - ,. . , e r I - l1. L L 1.;-f!f / r--2 (MIDDLE NAME • Le~ (FIR~'i' NAME) IF NONE PUT NMN) I certify that I am the above individual taking this examination. I understand that if it is later established tha t I have misrepresented myself, I and the person being misrepresented will be permanently barred fro m City employment and may be ptosecuted by the courts. If either is already employed by the City of Atlanta h.e may be subj ect: to suspens ion dismissal. 1/ L_ . ? /~ ,.:j /J ,. I ·"/./ . . . . . \.., S IGNED c,-. . "")v:~;;.1 ,1..-.L-"J, ·1",-~-- _;,.. -~~ ._; ,J ~ -. /;7 (,_/ _.J ~d ,1/' ~ _."'t" ,r.·.r·.f. ,,--1 . {/~fl'C. ..0:0-~". ~ ,l ,11··" • ·,1.? ,)' ,,, .,.... ,_.,r',;: j/ · 4: ...... ..I' .· ,·· -~-~-.. / V ::,,.:""i.J-, ' ,,•.,:,..,. ~-·~ --- " --· /' .,v' • .... \,,,-(;','.<....-.:,:::,..,,-,' .. '"'~ � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document + me Have you ever applied CITY OF ATLANTA PERSONNEL BOARD Veteran ——____ for City of Atlanta APPLICATION FOR CIVIL SERVICE EXAMINATION Chauffeur ———____ _emplcyment?, —_+—— : : . ¢ * lf "TYes?’ check with Interviewer 260 CENTRAL AVENUE, Ss. W. Operator so ae befcre completing this form. ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 es # ¢ OEE E28! Social Securicy Number? SES POSITION APPLIED FOR DATE DATE OF EXAM : DO NOT USE THIS SPACE Cc QL ee haan 29 4969 Discharge ——______ Medical License Education Court Record ——___. Experience Trade Report ——_______. Past Emp. / Additional Remarks: e/ GEE KZ LETC aT Vili? ECE Line se ee Ms Jit (TEALAD 5s) LIL [ AL2 FOBT wal 2 BLE SS €. Last at Firs st Middle | (or Maiden) “How long have you lived Address AIEEE LYE SF bbb: [fofostosbipy “Go. SLY/ at this address? Number Street Direction Apt. No. City State Zip Code previews adios 5/51). L/S 167) A Llib pate sp MELEE UE 7 a & GY Y Exiats To Telephone Number LEG 2b SY Place of Birth Lot. LL Le 2 Lapa Alternate Number Are you a citizen of the United States? fe, SPE al Height Sele eat Dan What is your husband’s or wife’s name? e : Single f= Bivcced—— Widow —____—._ No. of children cS Widower ——___ No. of dependents Sn Check appropriate: White ——_— Male Colored Female Z=_Masried If answer to any question below is ‘'Yes’’, explain. (Ask for_extra sheet if needed). Have you any disease, physical disability, or defect? b ‘ Have you ever been treated for a nervous or mental condition? SRD Are you receiving disability compensation? ff ‘ Have you ever been sued on a debt? > D Have you ever had your wages garnisheed? ae Separated - Have you ever filed for or been awarded bankruptcy judgment? = 7p = Have you any past due debts? i —— FORM 6-A-12 REV, 8/67 EXPLANATION: Have you ever been arrested or given a traffic ticket? LFS <_. If **YES’ list all crimes or misdemeanors, including traffic violations, with which you have been charged. Failure to admit any offense regardless of when or where it occurred, may cause rejection of application. (Ask for extra sheet if necessary). CHARGE WHEN CITY & STATE SENTENCE/FINE List any machines or equipment that you can operate efficiently. Are you presently employed?__f7 4) Have you ever worked for the City of ee i When Jf) wa c a V LLLEPAL. ELLIS Tae Are you interested in permanent work?_. wo GRP aa oe = Are you willing to accept remporary worl i How many times were you in service? - Pa Have you had military service? #5 Were all discharges ‘*Honorable DO NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LINE Branch of Service Service Duties J Date enlisted , Discharge reviewed by = Form Date separated . Reason for discharge : Honorable VA letter dared Per cence disabilicy _-__——EESSS——s« 3RReemarrksss Serial or File No.  Last . Year E ircle high Educational Record Name of School & Location Attended | Graduate pile complecat 3 Elementary Ae Df, Jf, “h ‘GQ 7. Sg A, Ca 1-2+3-4- La; be 3 Meee] = 7 LO Mle te Li le8 1 UT 27 | EX ee High School r == Ui } : 5 Pl Yes fo oa xo) LLL T4 thy R= Dye & VFL No oie 4 Ay College, Univ. c Yes oe No Degree & Major Subject Post Graduate Yes No Trade SE Yes No. of months Business School No attended “EMPLOYMENT RECORD: Account for all time since school. Incomplete applications rejected. (Extra sheet may be obtained from interviewer). Date Seared] Firm's Name (7 : MA, VO 7 CLx hot Al 7 WW? cb Le Final Salary/75 2? Date Left Mailing Address. LA > ea eee ON 5B Mae "it, J 20 L502 Mil pilin ae) GUS Reason fot Leaving Number Street Direction / City State Zip Code Despribe Duties AL Np Ay - ZB UCL Ll Ll £3 2 bety AD! bez fzZ Date Started ; hee “Firm’s Name L Ay AL ; pte =} Ly Lhe LTAY (4, LG cag Le: Pe Lie O° Final Salary es Date Left Mailing Address ae ee 95 % ULE ah), [of tp Mt LOL LD Lil Soe Anda Pape Reason for Leaving: Number “Street itection ‘City State Zip Code yn fren Bay Le tier Describe Duties Lyle AVAL Le Ltt ZG AGE ied 2 = Dare Started : oo ” Firm? ‘Name : . A wv te . i» 3 ed eis u- fee. ce et fr Awe é ¢ Pear ied Final Salary (fast Lt ili ‘ ~ a aoe eee ale a ee ee CEI ls FER -Reagon for Leaving Number Street ~»* Direction - ‘City State Zip Code NAA! th Describe Duties {/ * fe peg , 5 ff sf ae ¢ s. ep AT agen Ae reta a LK fs Lt ttle / /Date Started Je Firm’s Name ee A; Scar ; é SZ = i7 Y Ke it LPP RAD pols gi Cy feats’ ¢}' Final Salary ( Ps Date Left 6 Mailing Address _ 4 ea Z/ ‘4 Df Ra. FE Cf ~ é zy / (ale Cite fee é ZL F 2/4 Ee Mth Lo 24 et / Reason for Leaving _ Number * Street . Direction ° City “State Zip Code Describe Duties Aj Pk) J Lyf oe dhe iy rok if be Ra A) the 2 KOE OC fa Date’ Started | Firm’s Name vias ee f j /- LAxCe Pee he 5 Final Salary : : “ye # : j / ’ Zé Date Left ‘ “f PURE Address POs : i oy pew Reason for Leaving Number Street Direction 4), “City” 25 / State Zip Code 4 _ Describe Duties AE a Boks 40 Geta Lert ee. dO ! ed fp HAA bee : 2A Zot oe List names and complete addresses of three character references. Do not list relatives or former employers. — - NAMES | ’ ADDRESS IIT, LAtite 2D, os Lz21% DE tinZE, JIA LiL = 22 f= EBL ff Numb “Street - . Direction City State Zip Code Wye Lisle espacial CIDE 6 a Mite ATi herk Ca Pees tis iy SORES Number Street’ 2 Direction LJ State Zip €ode 3 Spice Be be. Tot Yl“ Vie, 27 Crt’ C25) C+ LD “Sohn. LL lever, ATe. Jeo Brey = Ea Number Street Direction City State Zip Code I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that the statements in this application are PI i * i complere - the best of/my a and belie ee a) phy Reviewed by kpoate AD bo bga, fs Rote . 4 fy, /. sity EXAMINATION: hie fs gibt Li} DATE a 2 ¢ ae bs fae st a! ~ - rg PLEASE PRINT 5 n FULL NAME: Opphy're LA fe } OA FSS LE i // Lp, i) (LAST NAME) ~ (FIRST NAME) (MIDDLE ant ‘ IF NONE PUT NMN) ADDRESS : fZ 20 (Apaty Spd Sy LD ves AFL ff Ad 2TA Number Street _ Direction “(Apt. ae ive State Zip que, I certify that I am the above individual taking this examination. I understand that if it is later established that I have misrepresented myself, I and the person being misrepresented will be permanently barred from City employment and may be prosecuted by the courts. If either is already employed by the City of Atlanta he may be subject to eee ee r i SIGNED; Ere Better Af ~~ Spay . CO SEEN. VY Chk (flint Chin \  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 1, Folder 22, Document 17 Box 1 Box 1 Folder 22 Folder topic: Parks department | 1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/be6468e3c16551f8415895a71e4d6d7e.pdf a96099ab9dafcaf61cd97fdefa5bf938 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. -. / . January 31, 1969 Miss Bessie L. Whit_ehead 1220 Gardenia Street N. w. Atlanta, Georgia 30314 Dear Miss Whitehead: I regret to inform you that in the recent interview for Community Recreation Leader you did not attain a passing score. Therefore, your name will not appear on the eligible list. I appreciate the interest manifested .by you in undergoing this examination, and 1 hope that you v ill participate in such future tests as may interest you and for which you may be suited. Ii I I' ll · Very truly, CARL T. SUTHERLAND Director of Personnel CTS:BG:erw � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document January 31, 1969 Miss Bessie L. Whitehead 1220 Gardenia Street N. W. Atlanta, Georgia 30314 Dear Miss Whitehead: I regret to inform you that in the recent interview for Community Recreation Leader you did not attain a passing score. Therefore, your name will not appear on the eligible list. I appreciate the interest manifested by you in undergoing this examination, and IT hope that you will participate in such future tests as may interest you and for which you may be suited. ‘Very truly, CARL T. SUTHERLAND Director of Personnel CTS:BG:erw  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 1, Folder 22, Document 16 Box 1 Box 1 Folder 22 Folder topic: Parks department | 1969